OT Healthcare scaremongering almost identical to argumentation about our 3rd rail called "Medicare" circa 1965, pooling high risk people with low ones is what spreading risk means.
37th of 82 nations in delivering healthcare, if the spoiled young I want it all now brats bitch about pitching in when healthy, it's no wonder we send them off to worthless wars to get what they deserve-death and dismemberment, so they can qualify for healthcare the old fashioned way, by being wounded or dead.
Five years from now, a politician speaks out against "universal" health care, he's gone. Been there seen that. It's BORING OT bullshit==move to the MO board please!
You lost, and the part of America to be proud of, not the ones bombing sheep herders out of existence just to bitchslap somebody Arab post 9/11 and steal their oil one billable hour at a time, has spoken.
Want to see that make a difference? Watch Glenn Beck cry because his asshole operation went wrong. Hell he almost lost his mind.
I wouldn't mind if health care were a $1T target, but would everybody mind if we hit the other targets, $1T worthless war, $1T to banks to line their pockets, first?
We pay off the gentiles in charge, bomb the heathens out of existence for their own good, then find out if taking care to make sure the lowly got health care was a spendthrift item so they go in the toilet first.
Sorry, it makes no sense to me.
You forgot one thing on your post my friend, those holding their free copies of the Constitution from the Heritage Foundation might as well use as toilet paper - that's all they're good for.
A special thanks to both the Bush & Obama administrations.
I'm glad to see that others recognize that this current circumstance has actually been the result of choreographed behavior of both wings of the Communist party, the Republican and the Democratic.
Knowing that the Poles beat the Russian occupiers by launching national strikes, one can only wonder when that will happen here.
Thanks for the thoughtful posts. I agree that since the Johnson administration, we've nothing but crooks, liars, debt builders however affable, cheats, drunks, loons that think all you have to do is breathe and you're entitled to a house, all the way to the current administration.
But on balance, $1T immediately to banks to pay them off for bankrupting America by killing the golden goose of real estate--literally gutting the basis of the country, the ownership of real property by making it a right instead of privelege borne of good credit--$1T for worthless wars to steal oil from Arabia ("the Iraqi's will pay for our granting "Iraqi freedom" efforts with oil or money"--George W Bush) gone and without end, versus, $1T for healthcare over ten years to give joesixpac someplace to go besides the emergency room for free care anyway, bumping the rest of us--I say this is the least of the moral quandaries facing our pocketbooks.
Again, in five years, all the hatemongering will blow over, just like it did Medicare, and it will become the third rail of politics untouchable by anyone who wants to stay in office.
We are THIRTY SEVENTH in the world's health care providers. Heads of state come to the US for the same reason they buy Ferrari's instead of Corollas--it LOOKS good.
I can get expat medication from top of the world doctors for 20 cents on the inflated dollar--you want competition, let insurance co's pay for operations in Malaysia, Japan, Mumbai India, and watch the price of healthcare drop.
Then all the white boys can frequent the home boys here, and be happy, while the rest of us get better care for just about every operation you can mention.
For those who like competition, what are you afraid of?
Frankly, sir, your post is nothing more than obfuscation. Medicare is just as grievous an unconstitutional affront as Social Security or Obamacare. To point to the fact that its imposition has become part of the fabric, like the seemingly inoperable tumour that it is, and call it good points out the simple fact that you apparently are of the mind that socialism that benefits you is good socialism. I do not hold with that mindset because I know it is immoral to take from one person to give to another without the willing consent of the former.
As far as your comments regarding competition are concerned, I'm all for it. I had to leave America to receive cancer treatment unavailable here and I paid for it myself. Were it not for the unconstitutional 4th branch of government, now on steroids because of nationalized healthcare, that is manifest in the alphabet soup of various agencies, I could have had the treatment at home for probably 1/6 the cost with no air fare or hotel bills to boot.
I don't mind being in a "minority". The rule of numbers has nothing to do with correctness or soundness of thinking EITHER way. It's mobocracy, more torchbearers than witches on a witch hunt hunting down witches does not validate the witch hunt, the reality of witches, whether or not they constitute a real threat, if there are such thing as witches or not. It's name calling, labeling, instead of THINKING, the easy way out, shorthand for small, or tired, or frightened minds.
The same group of deep thinkers allows us two worthless wars in the Middle East while DoD buddies sweat N Korea and Red China, and even a resurgent Russia every day, and our only defense, nukes. The same deep thinking goes to school every day to learn of a rational universe yet believes the world 6000 years old. The same rich thinkers were sure the world is flat, and the sun revolves around the earth, (because we're so "important", because god made "us" center of the universe). The same deep thinkers would kill you, torture you by vilest means first, if they thought you didn't believe in the identical god they did through their apostacy, rather than your independent church.
Yeah, long live "the most" versus rational right versus wrong.
Why don't you choose a wife by weighing her tits?
Maybe volume, mass, and weight do count!
Perky...where do we put perky?? Oh yeah, a mass multiplier....
for the record, I didn't say you were wrong. In fact, I share many of your opinions about religion. I was cautioning moses about trying to sway your opinion.
A pyramid looks like a large square pile of rocks from above and a triangle from the ground. Neither is wrong nor completely right. Debates on politics & religion invariably break down into a pissing contest because each side ends up defending their perspective without any regard to the other's perspective.
I will agree with you on one thing. Glenn Beck is simply awful and I suspect he is nothing more than a shill.
Nonetheless, the majority of Americans (in fact the ones most likely to be bearing the brunt of the attendant financial burden wrought by this unconstitutional piece of horse shit) were overwhelmingly against Nationalized Healthcare. This clearly illustrates that government no longer is representative as originally designed and has been supplanted by those that are forwarding the nanny state mentality to a growing quotient of duped individuals unschooled in the essence and concepts embodied in the novel experiment predicated on individual liberty and responsibility. The Fabian Socialists (a term I only use in polite company) have been hard at work and unrelentingly so. Allowed to stand, our country will have turned a corner that will one day serve as the guidepost to illustrate at which point the American experiment ceased to exist.
Government cannot give to one person that which it has not stolen from another. Truthfully, and as simply stated in the Declaration of Independence, government's only legitimate purpose is to protect life, liberty and property (Jefferson's first choice of words, but he watered it down to the 'pursuit of happiness'). Anything else is an infringement on the rights of the people and is clearly usurpation and evidence of moral turpitude.
Health care is not a right to be provided at the expense of others by holding a gun to their heads. That is nothing more than robbery.
I really don't think we've seen the end of this.
Technically speaking, sir, the Constitution for these united States, while providing for a standing Navy, specifically precludes any provision for a standing Army. So, you tell me.
Of course, the Founders took a non-interventionist view and warned us quite vigorously about the dangers of foreign entanglements. Since we weren't, in their view at least and one that I hold as well, supposed to be sticking our noses in everyone else's business, defense of the land was to be performed by a "well regulated militia"...yet another indication of the abdication by CONgress of its enumerated duties.