Archive for June, 2009

In this time when it seems that everyone is trying to hand us a crap sandwich, I have gained a new appreciation for the little surprises.  No, I’m not talking about putting on a jacket and finding $20 in the pocket.  Once the Obama economics kick in, I doubt that’s gonna by a small fry at McDonalds.  No, I’m talking about reconnecting with old classmates on Facebook and finding out that just like you, they had kids and figured out that conservatism now makes some sense, or that it isn’t a ‘fetus’, its a child.  Better yet is when the Supreme Court takes a bull by the horns and sends a ruling that puts the race-pimps on notice that the days of double-standards will not last, and at the same time, hands a racist judge another defeat, issued from the very bench that she aspires to divide us from.  Yeah, these surprises are treasured.  Its like a perfectly chilled beer on a brutally hot day, a four-day weekend at the beach, or having a mind bursting with ideas and blank paper and sharp pencils in front of you.  And we need those moments.

The House of Representatives did the inexcusable last Friday.  They passed a bill, chock full of taxes for everyone, and tax credits for ‘lower income persons’ funded directly by you and me.  When these wealth redistributions are written in to the same bill that the taxes are in, the government has dropped all pretense of avoiding such notions.  In such a rush to pass the bill, Nancy Pelosi, (D) San Franfreakistan, wouldn’t even let a copy of the 1000+ page bill incorporating the 300 pages of  amendments introduced at the 3 am on the day of the vote be compiled and placed on the floor of the House for the representatives to read during the debate.  This was only fitting, however, since the bill was not yet completed, and the floor copy contained ‘placeholders’, which were essentially blank chunks inserted into the text as substitutes for provisions that would be inserted later, after the representatives had voted to pass the bill.  Let that sink in for a moment.  They voted on something that they had not even read, and had not yet been written.  Could you or I get away with this? Personally or professionally?  Hell no!  Yet these people, who purport to represent us, voted to raise everyone’s taxes, to support a scientific theory that is not provable, and is in fact, a lucrative hoax for the Preisthood of Global Warming (see Gore, Al).  They didn’t even vote for a bill they didn’t read, they voted for a bill not yet written.  Such a starling abdication of responsibility has not gone unnoticed.  I invite Congress to explain, seriously explain, why this is not taxation without representation, an act once considered to be tyranny by people with greater intestinal fortitude than the American Idol watching, Nike wearing , Pepsi-swilling masses of today, who obsess more over the death of a singer, who in life was a one-man freakshow at best, and vile, child molesting pedophile at worst.  My own congressman, Dave Reichert, (R)(eprehensible) decided that he didn’t really like being a congressman, so he voted for it, with seven other RINOs, who apparently have an equally strong aversion to serving in congress.  John Boener got it right when he responded to questions from The Hill about why he read portions of the bill on the floor “Hey, people deserve to know what’s in this pile of shit.”  I myself struggled all weekend with even trying to find the words for this betrayal by Congress.  I still really haven’t done so, but I’m starting to think that I could support a wide scale tax revolt to starve these reprobates of their main form of entertainment, robbing the American taxpayer to support policies that will hobble any economic recovery or competitiveness.

And on the divine leadship front, Barry the Blessed™, fresh off his “I-won’t-say-anything-encouraging-to-the-young-people-rising-up-in-Iran- for- fear-of-meddling” stint, has suddenly decided that while watching and “bearing witness” while scores of people die at the blood-soaked hands of oppressive thugs, that he has to make a strong statement against the lawful decision of the the Honduran Supreme Court and Military to bloodlessly depose a second-term President who illegally moved to allow himself to run for a third term, which is not allowed under the Honduran Constitution.  The Supreme Court told him “No.” and he tried to do it again, the Court order the military, which is responsible for ballots, not to allow the ballots with the offending referendum to be distributed, and to remove the President from office.  This President, who in the old days would have found himself dead is currently cooling his heels in Costa Rica.  Barry is very agitated about this and has gone on the record as saying “Honduras coup was “illegal” and Zelaya remains the president.”  Now Barry, lawfully removing someone from office when that is the proscribed penalty for their crime is not a coup, it is a triumph of law in a land not generally known for following it.  I do understand why it makes you nervous, though.  Your extraconstitutional activities are not the kind that are readily permitted by a population that respects itself, and the rule of law.  I think you know that too many of us know you for the power-hungry pretender that you are, and that the weight of your ambitious agenda are about to bring the house of cards down.  You have done well in building on the traditional Democratic Balkanization points.  Playing the right race cards while paying lip service to being a ‘post-racial’ President?  Check.  Giving the unions every possible concession at the expense of individuals and businesses?  Check.  Telling the poor that its all the fault of the rich and greedy while promising them subsistence in exchange for their freedom and power? Check.  Taxing every choice in America in exchange for a utopia that you yourself won’t participate in?  Check.  Consistantly usurping more powers for the Federal beast while telling the peasants its for their own good?  Check.

Keep digging Congress and Barry. The deeper the hole, the harder it is to get out when we start to fill it back in.

Read Full Post »

The left is predictably pointing to the Mark Sanford scandal, and gleefully rubbing its grubby little hands together at the prospect of being able to revel in the “HYPOCRISY!!!” of the public failure of a man to live up to the ideals he professed.  Some of my friends on the right see it as a chance to discuss the left’s hypocrisy in its willingness to bring double standards to bear (treatment of Sarah Palin’s children versus the treatment of Barry the Blessed’s children,  or better yet, Barry’s conspicuous silence regarding this obvious disparate treatment).  While this is something that I deem to be a worthy topic of conversation, it does not get to the really offensive element of the left jumping up and down with glee and pointing everytime a conservative is caught in a scandal.  The real hypocrisy in this is the fact that left believes that the failure is a selling point for their side.

Fewer things get me more irritated then people who do not understand christianity thinking that a christian’s failure is a valid discreditation of the person or their beliefs.  Far too often, we on the right allow the left to use our religion against us.  Whether it is an attempt to brow beat us for not wanting to see the government expand their powers in providing healthcare at a dear price by insinuating that we are “bad christians for not supporting government health care for the poor“, or when they call us haters when we refuse to joyfully accept something our faith tells us is wrong because they have managed to convince some courts to abandon prior levels of scrutiny rooted in objective criteria for a looser standard of ‘equality’ based on the whims of the person, rather than measurable, innate characteristics over which they have no control, or the loudest cries of all, like those in the wake of a scandal like this. 

None of this is surprising.  Since the concerted effort to drive Christianity out of the public square gained ground over the last fifty years, rampant misunderstandings were a foreseeable consequence.  What was once a common frame of moral reference, based in part on a shared common moral history is now a target for scorn, and due to the very lack of understanding on the part of the most eager accusers, and a dumbed-down public, is frequently seen as a liability, rather than a steady source of authority and accountability.  What this means for the body politic is an impressive and ever deepening divide. 

America is no stranger to the sex scandal.  Indeed, the very concept is rooted in the puritanical beginnings of this country when shame was something that all but the basest soul possessed, and would rebuke even the most hardscrabble politician for his indiscretions.  Indeed, a number of such scandals have occurred in my lifetime, as this Newsweekarticle demonstrates.  What I believe has changed over time, is that fewer people understand some of the hard truths of christianity, so that when a christian fails, it is easy to condemn both the fallen and their faith.  I think to any self-respecting christian, these condemnations demonstrate the ignorance of the condemnor.  Why do I say this? 

1.  God does love us, but it is the love of a parent to a child.  That means love enough to impose standards, and to discipline.  This is why it is not ok to just do as you please, and then say “God is love, you hating hypocrite!” to christians who do not accept behavior they know to be wrong.  Christians accept that there really is a standard of right and wrong, and the idea that they will eventually answer to a higher authority than the law of man.

2.  Christianity imposes a set of standards for conduct and behavior on its adherents.  This is how christians are able to suss out which people pay the faith lip service, and which ones make the attempt to live by that set of standards.

3.  Sin is an inescapable condition for man.  There was only one perfect man.  His name was Jesus Christ, the son of God, and although all christians strive to follow his example, we will all fall short of the mark.

4.  Forgiveness has to be part of a christian’s repertoire.  What this means is that one of us falls, as we all will, that we must seek to forgive the fallen, as they should seek our forgiveness.

5.  Redemption is not a physical concept, it is a metaphysical one.  That means I don’t care how many childrens’ books Mumia has written, he still owes a debt to society that will only be repaid when the sentence is carried out.  There is a difference between saving your life and saving your soul, and it is a distinction too little understood in today’s world.

6.  Accepting the salvation God offers is a life-changing event.  It isn’t about flitting in and out of churches during election campaigns; it is about how you live your life every day.  It shines through in setting the standard for your children, and letting them see you stick to it, even when you might have reason not to.  It is about resisting temptations, temptations of the flesh, or of the heart.  It is about striving for fidelity, even if a marriage seems more like work than fun.  Its about doing these things because you believe that they are right, and because you believe that you will one day have to answer for the way you live your life.

If you know these truths from the experience of living them, then the left’s glee at failures like Mark Sanford’s affair takes on a different light.  For my mind, it seems cowardly for reveling in another man’s failure to live up to a set of standards that you yourself lack the courage to adopt.  I know many on the left refuse to see it that way, instead opting to state that it is silly superstition and nonsense, or that they see no reason to attempt a faith that rejects their actions and choices, but I submit to you that they knowthat they are wrong on this.  If this were not so, I can think of no other reason why ‘the deciders’ in our culture try so very hard to belittle Christianity, to mock it, to discredit it, and to vilify it.  The left makes excuses for terrorism, and radical islam, and at the same time, blames christianity for the ills of the world.  This is not the behavior of a rational actor; it is the behavior of a petulant child, rejecting an authority that it cannot beguile or negotiate with.  The left knows it has already been tested and comes up short, and thus it flings every bit of excrement it can lay its hands on at the one thing that can never control.  That is the real hypocrisy in a scandal like this one, and something so few people seem to see.

What Governor Sanford did was wrong.  It dishonors his wife.  It embarrasses his children, and it debases himself.  If we as christians expect leaders who can live up to christian standards, then he must be held accountable to the voters who share those expectations.  However, he does not deserve ire and vilification because he failed to live up to the standards he professed, he deserves understanding.  This failure will exact a price, and any redemption he attains will be sorely earned.  He has trials awaiting him in the days ahead.  I don’t envy him the path he’ll walk now, but I can and will pray for he and his family, that he and his wife can regain mutual trust and respect, and that his children can come to respect him again.  It isn’t ok to hate that kind of failure, or the person who failed, and that is where the left’s apparent jubilation is misplaced and churlish.  Its kind of like watching someone who is oblivious to the fact that they are making a complete and utter ass of themselves, and at the same time refuse any and all attempts to be taken aside and clued in.  That kind of hubris can only lead to really big fall.  I just hope the country isn’t underneath them when they come crashing to Earth.



Read Full Post »

Dear President Obama,

I believe that you are to be congratulated.  Your current occupation of the Oval Office represents the triumph of an ideological battle that never could have succeeded in the company of a well-educated and vigilant population, raised with the understanding of the founders’ ideals and the courage to live life, rather than the enslaving expectation that the necessities of life will be provided by a kleptocratic government, imposing an arbitrary and juvenile standard of ‘fairness’ on the minutiae of our daily lives.  How you, and friends like Bombing Billy Ayers must have laughed and laughed, at the knowledge that a nation that he and his friends worked so diligently to intellectually disarm were not only conned into electing a man 5 parts cypher and 2 parts unapologetic leftist, but that they did so eagerly, wrapped in the notion that they were voting for CHANGE! and the implecation that this CHANGE! was something good for America.  How amusing it must have been to have your wife stand in front of America and say that she has never been proud of this country until you decided to run for office.  What a grand joke you played painting with the brush of “Racism” and the hues of the boomers’ racial guilt.  They were half right.  Many of them never did anything to earn the good fortune that they enjoyed.  That was the gift that the previous generation foolishly gave to them.  I have no qualms with their guilt at having done so little to earn their good fortune, but I have every quarrel with what their guilt drove them to do, which was to spend all of their lives railing against the society that made their self-indulgent, petulant tantrums possible.  They were fertile ground for ‘educators’ who would eagerly incite them to fight against principals such as self-reliance, and constantly working to improve one’s self, rather than expecting a parent-like government to take care of everyone.  Decades of of this intellectual masturbation, under the learned and approving eyes of these ‘educators’ had the appropriate corrosive effect, as they patted the obedient heads of their pupils and reassuringly informed them that they were “doing something” and “making a difference” as they chisled away at something they did not understand but  bouyed by the unchellenged assertions taught as fact in the ivy-covered refuges of the culture warriors, believed was wrong.  These activities ate away at the family with the advent of welfare and the implementation of perverse incentives, and an unreasoning, ceaseless attack on a religion which just happened to be an integral part of the development of this country.  With fewer complete families to resist the the pernicious influence of the left, it became easier and easier to influence the succeeding generations to adopt ideals without a moral anchor or compass.

And now we have you.  A man of no accomplishment, who has no appreciation for this nation’s role in the world, who wants to grant every blessing and right of citizenship to people who have done nothing to earn them.  A man with so little regard for life that your one point of taking a stand was to fight so that the most innocent among us would not only be killed, but condemned to die alone.  The leader of the free world, who when faced with a defining moment that would help make a leader a legend, opted instead for the “safe” option by refusing to condemn tyrants and offer moral support for an oppressed people willing to die for democracy.  Instead, you invite these tyrants to American soil to observe the celebration of our standing like men and taking our liberty from an oppressor with both hands.  You make me ill.  You betray the best men who occupied the office you occupy now.  The very smallness of your soul tarnishes their deservedly proud memory.  You seek adulation rather than endeavor to serve and inspire this people.  You understand that all who went before you were men, and made mistakes, but you dishonor their beliefs and our collective heritage every time you step to the podium in a foreign land and dare apologize for those mistakes to people who could never hope to follow the same path that we have followed, or accomplish the achievements that have set us apart.  You believe that “American Exceptionalism” is an epithet.  A curse that invokes an image of an America that has somehow robbed other nations of their destinies; I believe that “American Exceptionalism” has improved not only our nation, but the world, and has been a source of inspiration for people everywhere who understand that our brand of liberty allows people to possess and control their own destinies like no other political climate in the world.

I never thought I could think so little of one who attained the position of “First Among Equals”, but the more I see you consolidate power that you were never meant to lawfully have, and time and again show contempt for the people of this nation and the ideals that built it, the more I am convinced that your legacy will be a spinning black void that will still be casting about for the aprobation and approval of the fawning masses long after your time on the main stage has faded into the darkened chapters of freedom’s history.    This void will preempt the casting of any shadow the like of any other President we have known.  Such will be the lot of any politician who professes such a love for this country that they believe they have to destroy the country to save it.  In the best of all possible worlds, you are reduced to an ignomius footnote in history; in the worst, your memory is vilified for the lasting damage you might inflict, as succeeding generations are surrounded by the constant reminder of you caused by their bleak surroundings.  I count the days until your departure.

Read Full Post »

DAD” decided to respond, sort of.  I never doubted his sincerity about believing all Americans should have health care, but he seems to think that an erudite response to questioning the authority to rob other Americans to pay for it is to attack the faith of the questioner.

This is  what we face, my fellow conservatives. The seductive, easy belief that health care is a right, and the government should and will be able to effectively and efficiently provide it for all, despite the graft, waste and correction practically written into the bill currently making the rounds. And these talking points are so easy. The Obamazombies will be able to effortlessly mouth them in the face of all manner of fact and logic to the contrary. Still, if you love this country, then it is a fight worth waging, because what Obamaand the Congress are proposing is certain death for countless numbers of Americans, and even greater involuntary servitude for the entire nation. ——————”————————————————————–”

True when I typed it last night, true today, and true tomorrow.

 Wow, I am honored that my blog entry #49 has caught the attention of some conservatives. It is amusing to read that my”gems” are easy to dispute and ridiculous. And yet, they spent so much of their blog dedicated to thinking about it, attempting to discredit it, and promoting it. I am very grateful for all the attention. And I’m grateful he provided me with more information to respond to. 

A post hardly consists of “most of my blog”, DAD.  Between here and the blogcradle at Blogsnot, I have been doing this for three years, so perhaps you should let just a wee bit of air out of your head before you start banging it on doorframes.  There was no “attempt to discredit your assertions”, they werediscredited, and rather than attempt to rehabilitate the naked assertions you made, you instead implied that I was for the government “bailing out” [purchasing public companies with my tax dollars] “financial institutions” and the car companies when anyone who reads my blog or my comments at various places around the internets KNOWS I am for no such thing.  You then pontificated on the Fist-Bumper-In-Chief’s mythical actions of “identifying problems, addressing them openly with the American people, and striving for mutually workable solutions”, then top it off with an implication that the last administration avoided problems.  How any of that dissembling falderal actually answered the pwning of your baseless assertions in support of healthcare is beyond me.

 He’s right I do believe health care is a right for all. And I believe like the government should offer a single payer health plan so that everyone in this country can have access to health care when they need it.

Again, I didn’t ever doubt it that you believe that it is a right.  I just happen to know you’re wrong.  You see, even if I didn’t have the degree in Political Science, the Law Degree, or the Master of Laws, I can still read.  The beauty of the Constitution is that it does a very good job of laying out what Government’s responsibilities are.  “Provide insurance so that every citizen of the country can have access to health care when they need it” is not in there.  Seriously.  Not anywhere.

These conservatives waste all their energy trying to distract from the essential issue. Will there be graft, corruption, and kick backs?  Yes. Is there presently kick backs? Yes. Ask your doctor, how many pharmaceutical vendors provide fees for them to endorse or use their products. Ask med students of the last 10 years, how many lunches were given to them by pharmaceutical companies. These points are just distractions. 

Distractions like commenting about the government take over of public companies in response to a thread about healthcare.  The discussion of the graft, corruption, and waste damn near written into the bill that would attach these shackles to Americans is merely pointing out some of the myriad of reasons why we don’t need to be handing whiskey and car keys to teenaged boys.

What conservatives fail to point out is whenever they are given free reign to be in charge, they don’t know what to do, so they abuse the privelages. Doubt me-ie, Bernie Madoff, GM, Mortgage Industry, Spiraling Healthcare costs, and on and on. Part of governments job is to provide some limits because as these examples show, when there are no limits, then self serving, greedy, narcissitic scumbags screw it up and ruin it for everyone.

Do your fingers always type at full speed while your brain is in neutral?  Bernie Madoff happened because regulators didn’t do their job and because a lot of wealthy people foolishly believed that they were part of an exclusive group that could enjoy returns at rates that the rest of us wouldn’t even dare dream of.  GM is the story of how the one-two punch of government’s misguided belief that it could legislate scientific advancement, despite the fact that the finished product that complies with onerous regulation is not what the customer wants to buy, and the intransigence of the United Autoworker’s Union and their stubborn refusal to make the concessions necessary to allow the company to continue as an even semi-competitive nature.  I grew up in Flint.  I saw this time and again for the first 29 years of my life. The mortgage industry?  Don’t make me laugh.  You read Nice Deb.  She has very thorough posts with the C-SPAN footage of Chris Dodd, Bwaney Fwanks, and Franklin Raines insisting that there is no problem.  She has links to the newspaper articles (yes plural) where Bush, who wasn’t a great president, raised concerns about the sub-prime loans and FANNIE and FREDDIE’s exposure.  And the legislation that helped make it possible, the Community Reinvestment Act?  That was passed on Carter’s watch.  “Spiraling Health Care Costs?”  I agree, they have been rising at a precipitous rate.  Of course, the facts such as charging insured patients rates that are an attempt to recoup what they lose treating everyone else, that might be one thing.  Government intervention won’t solve this.  Price controls never do.  But I suppose I should thank you for at least paying lip service to the topic at hand in that paragraph.

“Still, if you love this country, then it is a fight worth waging.” Again I’m struck by the simplistic thinking. So you can only love this country if you have conservative values. The other overly limited concept is if you believe in health care for all, then you are a socialist. It appears it is not possible to believe in healthcare for all, and enjoy freedom and financial prosperity.

It really is very simple.  When government undertakes to do a thing, it needs to have the authority to do so.  That authority must first be rooted in the Constitution.  Providing health care for all is not.  Period.  As for believing in healthcare for all and enjoying freedom and financial prosperity, the proposal on the table does not support it.  How do I know this?  Simple.  I have looked at the spending that the spendulous bill contains…more in less than 5 months than all the other administrations combined.  Then the CBO’s numbers on the projected costs of the Kennedy-Dodd Bill, numbers so staggering that the President has instead decided to rely on numbers generated inside the White House.  Conservative estimates peg this at almost 2 Trillion dollars in the next 10 years.  That works out to roughly $62,000 dollars a piece on the 16 million or so that the government is actually likely to cover with this boondoggle.  That’s more than I’ll pay to cover my family of four on our private insurance for the next ten years, even if I were to double the rate of increase over the last ten years and apply it to the next ten, and more importantly, it doesn’t even speak to the waste, and graft that will necessary accompany the government’s attachment to money that doesn’t belong to it.  When we aren’t even going to be able to pay interest on the borrowing necessary to finish fleshing out the abomination that spendulous is, adding that kind of burden is such an egregious act of generational theft that no one outside of Congress or the White House who has looked all the terrible facts squarely in eye can begin to believe that the two concepts you stubbornly insist go together are not mutually exclusive concepts.

What about all these high minded Christian values? What you deem socialist might be considered a good Christian ethic. Do unto others as you would have them do to you. Help the Poor and the less fortunate. I may have choices that 47 million Americans don’t have because financial hardship, poverty, mental illness, or the simple fact that no insurance company wants someone with a previous medical condition. So the fact that I am willing to sacrifice my freedom to have any insurance I want to insure that millions of people receive care would seem like the Christian decision to make.

Very good.  I give you points for eschewing one of the Left’s favorite indictments against Christians, “Hypocrite!!!” , opting instead to imply it.  However, your statement is only meaningful if you rely on certain assumptions, like as a Christian I do not already give to those in need, that the gifts we are admonished to give are somehow satisfied in the manner you prescribe, that all pre-existing conditions automatically and permanently invalidate coverage by private insurance in every single case, which is not true, or that my ‘giving’ should be dictated by your desires.  Let’s examine these a bit more closely, shall we?

As a Christian, I already give money through my church, which in turn, pools it with gifts from other congregants and then makes gifts according to the decisions made by my local church leaders.  Understanding their roles as stewards of those funds, they carefully examine potential donees to insure that their practices also make sure as much of the money as is possible is actually used to help the people who need it, not those administering it.  Being a small chain of hands that the money goes through, I can rest assured that there is both accountability to me for how my church spends it, and accountability to my church in how it is spent.  I don’t get the benefit of accountability in how the government spends my money.  There are numerous examples of how Congress members have stated on the record how they don’t believe my money belongs to me anyway.  In addition, the Bible specifically states “Each man should give what he has in his heart decided to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” 2 Corinthians 9:7, NIV.  Taxes are not a gift.  And although the U.S. Treasury maintains that our tax payment is voluntary, you need only not pay for a few years and you will find that the government does indeed compelyou to pay your taxes.  How does government fund anything it does?  By taxes.  As a thinking person, I can recognize that government would not be able to perform the functions it is specifcally allowed to do by the Constitution, and I accept that as necessary, but under no current definitions of the words could my tax payments be considered to be a gift, made not reluctantly or under compulsion.  Further, if you review our history, Christian communities within this country such as the Puritans and the Quakers did not advocate that all should pay to subsidize health care for those in their communities.  I know that the left likes to preach that Christianity requires wealth redistribution to take care of not only those who cannot take care of themselves, but also those who will not.   I am familiar with liberation theology.  The only way that works is taxation.  And the taxation necessary to pay for everything for everyone eventually comes at gunpoint.  That is stealing, and the last I looked, God takes a fairly dim view of it.  In fact, I believe his caution against it was a ‘landmark moment’.  If your christianity is settled with the idea that you get to decide for me what ‘gift’ I make and the manner in which it is given is appropriate, then I suggest serious contemplation of this:  “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principals of the world, rather than Christ.”  Colossians 2:8, NIV, followed by a rigorous re-reading of the entire book.

As for coverage of pre-existing conditions by insurance companies, it is true that in some cases some conditions will never be covered.  Others are covered after a waiting period.  The details are typically a combination of state law and business decisions made by insurance companies.  If they agreed to cover certain perexisting conditions, they would not be using the premiums paid by others for service in a responsible fashion, and they would be making bad decisions, much like the banks giving out mortgages to people who couldn’t pay them that you were so earnestly carping about earlier.  You might at least make an attempt at consistency, but that would require you to temper your emotions with reason, and that simply won’t do for a true believer in Obama.

Unfortunately Conservatives seem to pick and choose when it is Ok to be Christian.

I already answered your veiled charge of hypocrisy above.  You can peddle that elsewhere.  We ain’t buyin’ here.

It’s Christian to oppose abortion because it is the same as killing the baby.

No, it isn’t “the same as killing the baby”, it is the willful slaughter of an innocent human being.  When women start giving birth to fishes, or kittens, or birds, then I might be willing to have a conversation with you about identification of the child as anything other than a child, and the act of snuffing it out as anything other than murder.

But if adults die because they don’t have health insurance and are denied access to care or medication, that is somehow Ok?

A facetious and fallacious analogy.  Emergency rooms are not allowed to refuse treatment on the basis of ability to pay.  That particular pickle means that we not only already pay for the medical care of our indigent, but of the citizens of other nations as well.  Ask any ER doc in Texas, Arizona, California, etc.  Secondly, some people refuse help, even help in the form of treatment.  The mentally ill you were wringing your hands over earlier?  You might find some who were denied care by overburdened state-run facilities.  You will also find those who walked away from treatment.  Adults make decisions.  Decisions are the ultimate harbinger of consequences.  Do they lead to sad and tragic results?  Absolutely.  But adults have something that the victims of abortion NEVER have.  The opportunity to make choices.   I believe that you are sincere in wanting everyone to have access to medical care.  However, there are other options available that do not entail giving more money and power to people who have repeatedly demonstrated that they cannot use either wisely.  Give locally.  Work to fund clinics that provide free or low cost care to people.  Start a foundation.  All will yield positive results.  None require further mortgaging my children’s future to feed the biggest hog at the trough, the Federal Government.  Your noble intentions do not support a fundamental change in what this nation is to what you believe it should be.  Again, that is theft.  Theft of my birthright, of my childrens’ birthright, and my childrens’ childrens’ birthright.  If you want to live in a country where there is universal healthcare, there is no reason for you to tary in our company, and you need not travel far.  You can head to the North.  I interned in the Canadian House of Commons in 1993.  I know that all that glitters is not gold, and that even with universal care, people die there for want of care or medications.  The same is true in Britain.  If this ponzi scheme is forced upon us, it will be resisted.

If they want a fight, I hope the President gives the conservatives one. He has proven he can defeat the conservatives and will again…and again…and again.

The President didn’t run against a conservative…therefore he did not defeat any.  What he has proven is that a largely undistinguished (except for his firm support of denying babies who survived their Mother’s attempts to murder them to die alone, without even basic comfort care, the touch of another human being with the compassion to let them know that they are people and the accordance of that simple and basic dignity)  Senator, who remains largely a cypher to this day, who has friends who are admitted Terrorists who set out to kill and maim other Americans, who has announced the belief that government should provide for people, rather than the traditional and tested notion that people should provide for themselves, can appeal to white guilt, is ashamed of this country, which has no reason to apologize to any other nation, and has ties to groups that keep getting indicted for all manner of election fraud, can give a series of speeches delivered in a manner that implies empathy and serious contemplation, while saying very little at all can manage to sucker 52% of the people into voting for him.  I don’t think his pat answers, populated with words like “sacrifice” and “unsustainable” will carry him as far in the next election, when the burden of high taxes, double-digit unemployment, and triple-digit inflation weighs heavily on John Q. Citizen’s brow.  Care to make a wager?

Read Full Post »

Occasionally, you read a comment at another person’s blog that sets you laughing so hard that you have to follow the link back to the lair of the true believer who uttered it.  This was the case for me yesterday at Nice Deb’s in the thread on the Iranians who are rising up for democracy in their homeland.  Specifically, we were discussing the Great Apologizer’s silence in the face of an obvious struggle for freedom, that was eventually broken with a lukewarm remark about his “great concern” for the people affected by the violence.  Of course, many of us were pointing out that unlike Regan’s strong statement of support for the Poles and Solidarity in their struggle against the REAL Evil Empire, we didn’t expect anything the like from Barry the Blessed, as he fails to see why America is different than any other country on the globe, and actually possesses the moral authority to make statements in support of people fighting for their liberty.  That’s when we were treated to this gem by “4WRD THNKN DAD“:

Unlike the hollow talk from our previous administration, our current President is skilled to know when to speak in a crisis and when to withold comment. If you are truly concerened about freedom, then you will understand that just speaking for the sake of speaking is hardly a statement of support.

After reading that, I figured that any newsletter “DAD” had would have to be great reading.  I was right.  He didn’t disappoint.  Today’s Post, titled 90 day writing challenge, day 49:Are You tired of all the Conservative Gloom and Doom about Healthcare yet? contained these gems:

I realize the President wants to push for a health care system that will appeal to everyone. I have come to the conclusion this is wrong. He should just go for a single payer health plan and let his conservative enemies wait for the day big government comes in and gives them a rectal exam. They have no interest in working with him, and at the present time he doesn’t need them. Just go for it, and let them whine.

“He should just go for a single payer health plan and let his conservative enemies wait for the day big government comes in and gives them a rectal exam.”?Apparently he is well trained in the Left’s favorite defense as explained by Professor Klavan. 

For all their chatter during the past 8 years, I’m getting tired of hearing all their crying about big government making decisions about their health care. Don’t buy it. If you’ve been denied tests, medication, or other health services because your insurance company won’t cover it, you know its private insurance that is presently the enemy not big government.

Of course, the draft of the Kennedy-Dodd act that is circulating has the states deciding which companies can compete in the state market for those loverly government subsidized policies for those who qualify…a veritable recipe for graft and kickbacks for those companies politically connected to the state governments, and a freeze out for those that aren’t.  So much for increased competition leading to better pricing and selection.  Don’t just take my word for it.  But of course, big government, paying with your tax dollars, is a much better choice.

When they point out the ineptitude of government to provide services, tell them to check out how many people are actually turning down medicare? Ask them to talk to vets who get medical services and medications for nominal costs through the VA hospitals if they want to pay insurance companies for health benefits. In other words, don’t get sucked into their fear tactics.

The only problem with that is that no one has a right a refuse Medicare.  As soon as you reach the eligible age, you’re in.  And even better?  Why would a private company cover you if you were eligible?  I get to hear a lot about Medicare.  Not only do I frequently help clients to plan for it, my boss and both our assistants are in the program.  They are not exactly thrilled with the coverage that they get now, and in order to come up with the more than 1 Trillion dollars in funding for the 16 million or so the new entitlement would cover, Obama has floated the idea of a 313 Billion Dollar cut to Medicare over the next ten years.  This is in addition to the 309 Billion Dollar cut he proposed in his budget plan for 2010.  Now it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that such a proposal means less money to pay for services to a growing demographic.  This means either price controls, which will mean even fewer doctors accepting Medicare patients, which will reduce the quality and availablity of care, or that it will pay for less than it already does.  I have yet to talk to a senior citizen who is excited by either prospect.  As for the VA, living near an Army medical facility, I can tell you that I don’t always hear how wonderful their care is, but more to “DAD’s” point, we are talking about conditions incurred in the service of our nation.  As far as I am concerned, they are entitled to at least adequate medical care on the taxpayer at a minimum.

But the coup de grace, in true Slo Joe “paying taxes is patriotic” Biden fashion, he believes this is his strongest argument:

If none of that works, use a tactic out of their playbook-patriotism. How patriotic can they be if they can’t stand behind the President of the United States. Aren’t they ashamed for comparing the great United States to smaller, less complex countries?  Tell them “real” Americans will work with the President to make the changes work, and make it the model health care system in the world. Tell them to stop all their conservative gloom and doom talking and join the rest of us in making a health care system for all to admire.

I don’t stand behind the President because he has done nothing to show he stands for America.  He panders to interest groups, he constantly grabs power that he is not lawfully entitled to, he backs taxpayer funded schemes to seize private property, and he constantly apologizes to other nations in speeches that make it clear that he is a believer in the flawed doctrine of moral equivalence, and his actions indicate that in order to give credence to the idea, he is willing to destroy every vestiage of the American Exceptionalism that undermines that philosophy.  In short, he believes neither in the promise of America or its proven ability to generate one of the best overall standards of living for people who have the courage to do for themselves and keep government as a servant, rather than to serve government and subsist on whatever morsels it chooses to let us have from the enormous wealth we generate. 

As for the rest, “Real” Americans know that health care is none of the government’s business and if the government becomes a coverage provider, then the most offensive and onerous micromanagement of our daily activities cannot be far behind, since “everyone” will have a stake in what everyone else is doing.  I don’t want the government in my kitchen, and I don’t recall in the Constitution where it says “And the government shall take it upon themselves to make sure that everyone who wants it will have health insurance.”  The health care system we have is the model for the world.  Just ask the Canadians who come here because they don’t like waiting eight months for an MRI, or the British breast cancer patients who have been told that a drug that is an efficacious treatment for their condition is too expensive so they can’t have it.  I bet they aren’t really thrilled to have so much of their money allocated to a system that doesn’t take care of them.  In all honesty, I can’t say that I believe that it is fair in any way to cause us all to pay for care for some, but then, I’d like my boys to have the opportunity to work for themselves some day, and not the government.

This is what we face, my fellow conservatives.  The seductive, easy belief that health care is a right, and the government should and will be able to effectively and efficiently provide it for all, despite the graft, waste and correction practically written into the bill currently making the rounds.  And these talking points are so easy.  The Obamazombies will be able to effortlessly mouth them in the face of all manner of fact and logic to the contrary.  Still, if you love this country, then it is a fight worth waging, because what Obama and the Congress are proposing is certain death for countless numbers of Americans, and even greater involuntary servitude for the entire nation.

Read Full Post »

I normally don’t post a link only, but this is too good to adulterate. The author gets it, and in saying so, speaks for me too.

Now shoo…go read it.

Read Full Post »

Drudge is reporting that ABC will broadcast from the White House and allow Barry The Blessed™ to run an unchallenged infomercial for Obamacare™.  I wonder if Gibbs will be a standup guy and call Charlie Gibson in the morning?

Read Full Post »

A question for the self-appointed cognoscenti who keep using their soapboxes to tell us how “stupid” Sarah Palin is:  Why do you keep telling us?  Out of all the “important” things you could be lying and dissembling about, why do you keep spending precious time on preaching to us about how dumb she is six months after the election?

Also:  Keith Olbermann foaming at the mouth about her stupidity?  That is an extra special moment.  Its so rare as an adult to watch the class dunce making fun of the kids who haven’t been held back.  Besides, its the only reason to watch the sad sack.   What are are your ratings now, Keef?  A point oh one share?

Read Full Post »

From Reuters:

 The Obama administration stepped up efforts on Thursday to push for measures to tie executive pay at all publicly traded companies more closely to performance, but faced some skepticism from lawmakers.

Allpublically traded companies…who needs the Constitution?  Comerade Obama will relieve businesses of the “burden” of bargaining with their executives to set pay.  Unbridle ambition interwined with unquenchable lust for power.  I wonder when the remaining Americans, you know, the ones with the courage to make their own lives, will decide that the usurper has reached too far?

On Wednesday, the Treasury Department said that seven companies receiving government bailout money will be subject to strict oversight on pay for their top executives and other highly paid employees. Treasury also said it wants new laws to empower the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to ensure that shareholders have more say in setting pay.

“While the financial sector has been at the center of this issue, we believe that compensation practices must be better aligned with long-term value and prudent risk management at all firms,” Treasury Counselor Gene Sperling told the House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services.

And that is the crowbar that they will use to pry their way into board rooms around the country, including those who turn down the government’s offer of ‘help’.

Both President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner have said that Wall Street compensation practices encouraged excessive risk-taking, sowing the seeds of the financial crisis that has driven the United States and many other countries around the globe into recession.

Ignoring, of course, the effects of the CRA and the Dhimicrats steadfast refusal to look into the activities of Freddie and Fannie while their friends and cohorts were taking their case out in wheelbarrows and dump trucks.  Why is it Bwarney Franks and Chris “the freind of Angelo” haven’t been driven out of DC by angry mobs yet?

Lawmakers from both major parties expressed uneasiness at the prospect of what they considered growing interference by government in business affairs. They suggested that regulatory reform and a determination to let companies stand or fail on their own would be preferable to putting taxpayer money into struggling companies.

I wish I could believe this, but billions of dollars away from where we started, I’m not buying their sudden meeting with Jesus.

You can go read the rest.  I have a sudden urge to go re-read the Constitution yet again.  Try as I might, I haven’t been able to find the part that gives Congress the authority to interfere with the ability of individuals and entities to enter into a contract.

Read Full Post »

From the Associated Publicists:

GREEN BAY, Wis. – Surrounded by supportive citizens in the heartland, President Barack Obama on Thursday challenged lawmakers back in Washington who criticize his proposed health care overhaul. “What’s the alternative?” he asked.

“Supportive citizens”.  That’s an interesting way for the Press to refer to itself.  “What’s the alternative?”  Gee, I dunno.  How about not forming yet another government burocracy, staffed be people who are not elected and completely unaccountable to the recipients of the very “care” you propose to give them with money that is not yours and that hasn’t yet been printed.   Not every “problem” can be made better by government meddling and liberal application of the public fisk.

A dispute over Obama’s desire to create a new government-sponsored health plan to compete with private insurers is forming a major obstacle to bipartisan consensus on health reform. So the president, undertaking a new and aggressive push to see legislation enacted this year, worked sell his ideas on health reform directly to Americans.

And gee, no one knows why that would be, except when the regulator is also a player in the market, the private entities soon learn they are at a disadvantage, and the net effect for the consumer is a decrease in choice, not an increase in competition.

He described his critics as naysayers.

And I describe him as a red-cored leftist who is saturated with ambition and the desire to change this nation from a beacon of freedom to another slovenly outpost of mediocrity, dampening the souls of men and destroying their dreams as it forces them into endless shuffling lines to receive whatever the elite ruling class deems sufficient to mete out to the masses forces to be dependent upon them.  While my definition is more descriptive, the name calling doesn’t get us anywhere.

“I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years,” Obama said at a town-hall style meeting at a high school here. “Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer.”

Of course, he didn’t explain why Americans should even begin to believe the forecast offered by a proven liar who has demonstrated a complete inability to act with fiscal restraint.

The president’s warnings come as reservations have been expressed by health care providers, Congress — led by Obama’s fellow Democrats — and the public. The brief ride from the airport to a town hall-style meeting featured a rare sight for the new president: a large gathering of protesters.

This shouldn’t be a shock.  Now that his fiscal policies are starting to take hold, more Americans who care about what he is doing have lost their jobs, and have the time to join the true-believers and party faithful who can be counted on for his much needed ego boost of the slobbering adoration of the masses he came to save.

Signs held among the several hundred demonstrators lining his route said “NObama” and “No to Socialism.”

I like “No taxation without representation!” myself, but maybe that’s just me.

Meanwhile, back in the feverswamps of the DC, some Republicans showed just enough backbone to destroy the media assisted myth of broad bipartisan support for this madness.

“We see that as a slippery slope to having the government run everything,” Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wy., said at a news conference.

The Senator might be on to something there.  Maybe if he just keeps reaching, he’ll find a clue and apply it to the problem at hand.

But Obama, answering a question at the town hall meeting, said no one — “certainly not me” — is interested in a nationalized health care system, like that in Great Britain. The president said the government is not going to force any change upon people who are pleased with the plan they already have with their employer.

The lie of course being that once government gets in and sets the amounts paid for various proceedures, and brings all sorts of coersion to bear on medical care providers, many will leave the business rather than accept government mandated poverty.   The ones that remain will not be free to set the rates for their labor.  The government will have relieved them of that “burden” by backdoor means. The synergistic effect will both drive private insurers and doctors out of the business, leaving no real choice for coverage and too few doctors to serve too many patients, which would be much like…hey waitaminute!!!  You mean that The Pretender-In-Chief is lying???

“When you hear people saying socialized medicine, understand, I don’t know anybody in Washington who is proposing that,” he said.

…he said, with his fingers crossed behind his back, as he hoped no one would actually think it through, and realize that that is exactly what he proposed.

For his goal of reshaping the nation’s health care system to bring down costs and extend coverage to 50 million uninsured Americans— an overhaul that has vexed Washington for decades — Obama has set an August deadline.

And hoped that the usual tactic of creating an air of urgency would be enough to once again pressure Congress into passing legislation spending trillions of dollars with little or no consideration of the reasoning behind it would work yet again.

“This next 6-8 weeks is going to be critical,” he told his audience, asking them to help pressure Congress to get it done. If the country puts off health care reform, he said, “it’s never going to happen.”

“ITS CRITICAL!!! WHY???  BECAUSE I SAID SO, DAMMIT!!!  I hope he’s right.  If we can put this off long enough, the effects of his disasterous spending will start to take hold, and spending trillions of our dollars when we are getting slammed by inflation and high interest rates, Congress will have a much harder time looking in the eyes of their constituents and believing that passage of such a boondogle would not cost them dearly.

Senators of both parties agree on many big issues, including getting all Americans covered and prohibiting insurance industry practices that deny coverage to people with health problems. But there remain major disagreements over how to pay for the $1.5 trillion it will cost over the next decade to cover uninsured Americans, whether to require employers to offer coverage and whether government-sponsored insurance should be one option.

Demonstrating why both parties fail to understand that they are part of the problem.  “Getting all Americans covered” with ObamaCare is not their job.  However, if they insist on going down this road, I insist on their participation in the plan, with no special favors for them.  I suspect that such a restriction would cool their enthusiasm.

Obama has detailed few specifics that he is for and against, and did not break any new ground on Thursday. He said he won’t run roughshod over Congress with a “my way or the highway” approach and is “happy to steal other people’s ideas.”

Of course not.  Direct opposition isn’t his way.  He’ll simply send one of his ‘czars’ to threaten and extort those who do not see the wisdom in destroying America to save it.

The president also acknowledged that extending coverage will cost “a good deal of money at a time where we don’t have extra to spend.” He promised anew that he will not allow reform to add to the deficit, and said he will propose new savings “in the days to come” beyond those already outlined to help explain how reform will be financed.

But, he said, that won’t be enough.

That’s a british understatement.

“I’ll be honest, even with these savings, reform will require additional sources of revenue,” Obama said.

You think?

He proposes raising taxes on the highest-earning Americans by limiting the value of deductions they can claim, including charitable donations. This idea has little backing on Capitol Hill.

I see.  Equality in everything but tax treatment.  Spoken like a true class warrior.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »