Why I oppose health care reform in its current incarnation

[Mong Hu]

While I do not agree with every political and economic belief of the author much of what he says presents well my thoughts and concerns regarding the current health care debate. The article is worth a read if you have time and care to engage in deeper thought about the relationship of liberty and property rights. I realize that many do not care to engage in political discussions on the board but we have just finished our playoff run up here in the frozen north (we lost in the second round on a failed 2 point conversion with 17 seconds left in the game) and I need some distraction from my woes and sorrows. So if you do not wish to engage in this type of discussion please move to another thread. This is, after all, the yard and politics is just as off topic as "Man Law". If you would care to read the article and comment then by all means enjoy.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=09

[SkyHighSkyline]

In response to the thread topic, I would like to state the following:

1. Who Cares?

2. Who comes to a high school football message board to discuss such issues?

3. Really???

[Mong Hu]

In response to the thread topic, I would like to state the following:

1. Who Cares?

2. Who comes to a high school football message board to discuss such issues?

3. Really???

In response to your questions.
1. I don't know who cares. Perhaps no one and that is OK with me. I just read the article and wanted to share. There are people on this board who I really enjoy talking to about topics such as these. If they care to share then great if not that is OK too.

2. I did not come to the board to talk about these type of things and was really surprised to find people who were high school football fans talking about everything from cooking, to soccer, to religion, to politics with one another. I found it refreshing and enjoyable and is really the reason that I come back to this board and have stopped participating in others. So to answer your question directly I guess me.

3. Yes really.

[yankee]

In response to the thread topic, I would like to state the following:

1. Who Cares?

2. Who comes to a high school football message board to discuss such issues?

3. Really???

this is the yard, not the main statewide board. or are you unable to comprehend the english language? if you just want to discuss football, then GTFO of the yard.

[SkyHighSkyline]

this is the yard, not the main statewide board. or are you unable to comprehend the english language? if you just want to discuss football, then GTFO of the yard.
Oh, I comprehend very well. The web "addy" for this site is 5ATexasFootbal.com! Now, I'm done.

[Firebird]

cool story, walter williams

[GoOwls]

Oh, I comprehend very well. The web "addy" for this site is 5ATexasFootbal.com! Now, I'm done.

We can only hope you are done.

Yes, it says 5Atexasfootball.com.....but this is The Yard....an off-topic part of the board...possibly you should get some of your parents tax dollars back by way of a refund because that Skyline education is failing you...

That fresh what?

[Mong Hu]

cool story, walter williams

I am unclear as to how this comment is intended. Is the intent of your comment the same as your intent in http://forums.5atexasfootball.com/showthread.php?t=59193 post #4? If this your intent then I think it is a rather childish response to a well thought out argument on the nature and role of our government. I don't mind that you don't want to participate in the discussion or that you disagree with the assertions in the article I offered. But there is no reason to trivialize either those who wish to have a discussion or the arguments of Mr Williams which have been presented in a thoughtful and intelligent manner.

If on the other hand you in fact believe that the story of Walter Williams, a minority professor (both racially and ideologically), who has achieved great success in the academic world and who has consistently come to conclusions that differ from those of many of his peers and yet has effectively advocated for his minority opinions is in fact a compelling story then we are in agreement.

Unfortunately I have a hunch that the former rather than the later is the more accurate description of your intent (I hope I am wrong). Have you just given up on open honest discussion amongst those with divergent opinions? I thought you made a living in a place that is supposed to foster these kinds of discussions not trivialize them?

[Firebird]

I am unclear as to how this comment is intended. Is the intent of your comment the same as your intent in http://forums.5atexasfootball.com/showthread.php?t=59193 post #4? If this your intent then I think it is a rather childish response to a well thought out argument on the nature and role of our government. I don't mind that you don't want to participate in the discussion or that you disagree with the assertions in the article I offered. But there is no reason to trivialize either those who wish to have a discussion or the arguments of Mr Williams which have been presented in a thoughtful and intelligent manner.

If on the other hand you in fact believe that the story of Walter Williams, a minority professor (both racially and ideologically), who has achieved great success in the academic world and who has consistently come to conclusions that differ from those of many of his peers and yet has effectively advocated for his minority opinions is in fact a compelling story then we are in agreement.

Unfortunately I have a hunch that the former rather than the later is the more accurate description of your intent (I hope I am wrong). Have you just given up on open honest discussion amongst those with divergent opinions? I thought you made a living in a place that is supposed to foster these kinds of discussions not trivialize them?


See, here is the thing. I used to really like Walter Williams. I would sit down and read his columns whenever they came out in my hometown newspaper at the breakfast table. My parents and I would usually discuss the editorials, go over strong points, and have a debate. My mom usually took the liberal side and my dad the conservative/Walter Williams side. Most of the time my dad carried the day, but my mom's arguments always seemd persuasive. But then one day I was shooting some b-ball outside of a school, and a couple of guys who were up to no good, started making trouble in my neighborhood. I got in one little fight and my mom got scared and said you're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air. I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said 'Fresh', and had dice in the mirror, If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought 'Nah, forget it - Yo, homes to Bel-Air!' I pulled up to the house at bout seven or eight, I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes, smell ya later!' I looked at my kingdom, I was finally there! To sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air!

[pied]

Post of the day.

It's early, but has to be a candidate for post of the week.

[Mong Hu]

See, here is the thing. I used to really like Walter Williams. I would sit down and read his columns whenever they came out in my hometown newspaper at the breakfast table. My parents and I would usually discuss the editorials, go over strong points, and have a debate. My mom usually took the liberal side and my dad the conservative/Walter Williams side. Most of the time my dad carried the day, but my mom's arguments always seemd persuasive. But then one day I was shooting some b-ball outside of a school, and a couple of guys who were up to no good, started making trouble in my neighborhood. I got in one little fight and my mom got scared and said you're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air. I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said 'Fresh', and had dice in the mirror, If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought 'Nah, forget it - Yo, homes to Bel-Air!' I pulled up to the house at bout seven or eight, I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes, smell ya later!' I looked at my kingdom, I was finally there! To sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air!

Thanks for the clarification perhaps I will catch up with you in some other discussion on a different topic at a later date.

[RedRage00]

See, here is the thing. I used to really like Walter Williams. I would sit down and read his columns whenever they came out in my hometown newspaper at the breakfast table. My parents and I would usually discuss the editorials, go over strong points, and have a debate. My mom usually took the liberal side and my dad the conservative/Walter Williams side. Most of the time my dad carried the day, but my mom's arguments always seemd persuasive. But then one day I was shooting some b-ball outside of a school, and a couple of guys who were up to no good, started making trouble in my neighborhood. I got in one little fight and my mom got scared and said you're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air. I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said 'Fresh', and had dice in the mirror, If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought 'Nah, forget it - Yo, homes to Bel-Air!' I pulled up to the house at bout seven or eight, I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes, smell ya later!' I looked at my kingdom, I was finally there! To sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air!


:notworthy

[GoOwls]

Go ahead pied, bird, and red.....go ahead and be jerks....I don't want to hear one word when it goes bad.

You are having fun now and I get that....it's even funny....but there is a time to be serious and you are doing your fellow man a disservice by not being serious from time to time...there are people here who think you are for real.....don't lead them down that slippery slope...you 3 are better than that.

OK.....Ha-ha....there you go....you got your laugh...now grow up a bit.

[pied]

Go ahead pied, bird, and red.....go ahead and be jerks....I don't want to hear one word when it goes bad.

You are having fun now and I get that....it's even funny....but there is a time to be serious and you are doing your fellow man a disservice by not being serious from time to time...there are people here who think you are for real.....don't lead them down that slippery slope...you 3 are better than that.

OK.....Ha-ha....there you go....you got your laugh...now grow up a bit.

Did you read the article?

[Dawg Fan]

See, here is the thing. I used to really like Walter Williams. I would sit down and read his columns whenever they came out in my hometown newspaper at the breakfast table. My parents and I would usually discuss the editorials, go over strong points, and have a debate. My mom usually took the liberal side and my dad the conservative/Walter Williams side. Most of the time my dad carried the day, but my mom's arguments always seemd persuasive. But then one day I was shooting some b-ball outside of a school, and a couple of guys who were up to no good, started making trouble in my neighborhood. I got in one little fight and my mom got scared and said you're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air. I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said 'Fresh', and had dice in the mirror, If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought 'Nah, forget it - Yo, homes to Bel-Air!' I pulled up to the house at bout seven or eight, I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes, smell ya later!' I looked at my kingdom, I was finally there! To sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air!

cool reply,bro

[chhspantherfan]

RR, I made a plea to you to take a look at this. You choose instead to trivialize it.

Pied, you know better.

Firebird, whatever problems you are having, now is not the time to be channeling your dream ego.

You guys want to make fun of good intentions. It is disheartening to see at the least.

Mong, thanks for trying to enlighten the unwashed.


that is all.

[chhspantherfan]

Did you read the article?

this part?

On the other side of the coin from limited government is individual liberty. The Founders understood private property as the bulwark of freedom for all Americans, rich and poor alike. But following a series of successful attacks on private property and free enterprise—beginning in the early 20th century and picking up steam during the New Deal, the Great Society, and then again recently—the government designed by our Founders and outlined in the Constitution has all but disappeared. Thomas Jefferson anticipated this when he said, “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.”

To see the extent to which liberty is yielding and government is gaining ground, one need simply look at what has happened to taxes and spending. A tax, of course, represents a government claim on private property. Every tax confiscates private property that could otherwise be freely spent or freely invested. At the same time, every additional dollar of government spending demands another tax dollar, whether now or in the future. With this in mind, consider that the average American now works from January 1 until May 5 to pay the federal, state, and local taxes required for current government spending levels. Thus the fruits of more than one third of our labor are used in ways decided upon by others. The Founders favored the free market because it maximizes the freedom of all citizens and teaches respect for the rights of others. Expansive government, by contrast, contracts individual freedom and teaches disrespect for the rights of others. Thus clearly we are on what Friedrich Hayek called the road to serfdom, or what I prefer to call the road to tyranny.

[chhspantherfan]

or this part?


This reminds me of a lunch I had a number of years ago with my friend Jesse Helms, the late Senator from North Carolina. He knew that I was critical of farm subsidies, and he said he agreed with me 100 percent. But he wondered how a Senator from North Carolina could possibly vote against them. If he did so, his fellow North Carolinians would dump him and elect somebody worse in his place. And I remember wondering at the time if it is reasonable to ask a politician to commit political suicide for the sake of principle. The fact is that it’s unreasonable of us to expect even principled politicians to vote against things like crop subsidies and stand up for the Constitution. This presents us with a challenge. It’s up to us to ensure that it’s in our representatives’ interest to stand up for constitutional government.

Americans have never done the wrong thing for a long time, but if we’re not going to go down the tubes as a great nation, we must get about changing things while we still have the liberty to do so.

[pied]

this part?


Was not directed at you.

[GoOwls]

RR, I made a plea to you to take a look at this. You choose instead to trivialize it.

Pied, you know better.

Firebird, whatever problems you are having, now is not the time to be channeling your dream ego.

You guys want to make fun of good intentions. It is disheartening to see at the least.

Mong, thanks for trying to enlighten the unwashed.


that is all.

Hey...what about me....I feel bad now.....:(

[pied]

or this part?




Americans have never done the wrong thing for a long time, but if we’re not going to go down the tubes as a great nation, we must get about changing things while we still have the liberty to do so.


huh?

[GoOwls]

Did you read the article?

Yes I did....did you?

[RedRage00]

RR, I made a plea to you to take a look at this. You choose instead to trivialize it.

Pied, you know better.

Firebird, whatever problems you are having, now is not the time to be channeling your dream ego.

You guys want to make fun of good intentions. It is disheartening to see at the least.

Mong, thanks for trying to enlighten the unwashed.


that is all.

That was in another thread. I'll read them later tonight.

[pied]

RR, I made a plea to you to take a look at this. You choose instead to trivialize it.

Pied, you know better.

Firebird, whatever problems you are having, now is not the time to be channeling your dream ego.

You guys want to make fun of good intentions. It is disheartening to see at the least.

Mong, thanks for trying to enlighten the unwashed.


that is all.



I simply commented that the post was funny. Still think it is. To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.

[GoOwls]

I simply commented that the post was funny. Still think it is. To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.

Non-partisan is in the eyes of the beer holder.

Non-partisan is a catch word for fools...there is no such thing....it's a unicorn....everybody and every group has an agenda on one level or another....wise up....start gleaning information and come to your own conclusions....don't be so lazy and hope someone does it for you.

Do you guys really think I only read conservative stuff....hell no....I read a bunch of it....helps me to sort out the junk...and yes, there is junk on the conservative side too.

[pied]

Non-partisan is in the eyes of the beer holder.

Non-partisan is a catch word for fools...there is no such thing....it's a unicorn....everybody and every group has an agenda on one level or another....wise up....start gleaning information and come to your own conclusions....don't be so lazy and hope someone does it for you.

Do you guys really think I only read conservative stuff....hell no....I read a bunch of it....helps me to sort out the junk...and yes, there is junk on the conservative side too.

Brilliant analysis.

Your broad generalizations of any who even question things, despite their views lead me to believe that if you do read non-conservative stuff that you are not doing so with an objective eye.

[GoOwls]

Brilliant analysis.

Your broad generalizations of any who even question things, despite their views lead me to believe that if you do read non-conservative stuff that you are not doing so with an objective eye.

Better to generalize and in general be right than specifically be wrong.

Thanks for the analysis approval...

[GoOwls]

brilliant analysis.

Your broad generalizations of any who even question things, despite their views lead me to believe that if you do read non-conservative stuff that you are not doing so with an objective eye.

nm

[chhspantherfan]

I simply commented that the post was funny. Still think it is. To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.

let's start here and i am sure the teeter-totter will go back and forth.

summary

· New regulations | New insurance industry regulations would prohibit insurers from rejecting customers based on pre-existing conditions. The regulations would also prohibit annual or lifetime caps on benefits.

· Insurance exchange | The bill would set up a new national health insurance exchange, a marketplace where individuals who do not have employer-sponsored insurance would be able to shop for plans. The exchange would also be open to small businesses, and more would be able to join each year. Companies with 25 or fewer employees would be able to join in 2013, companies with 50 or fewer employees could join in 2014, and companies with fewer than 100 employees could join by 2015.

· Public insurance option | The health insurance exchange would include a government-run public plan. Federal officials would negotiate payment rates with doctors and hospitals that accept the plan.

· Employer mandate | Employers with annual payrolls greater than $500,000 would be required to either provide health insurance for their employees, or contribute 8 percent of their payroll to a federal fund to help subsidize employees who purchase coverage through the exchange. Employers with payrolls less than $500,000 would be exempt from the mandate.

· Individual mandate | Individuals will be required to purchase health insurance, or pay a penalty fee. Some people would be eligible to apply for a hardship waiver.

· Medicaid expansion | Medicaid would be expanded to cover everyone whose income is below 150 percent of the poverty line, or about $33,000 per year for a family of four.

· Affordability subsidies | People who earn between 150 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level would be eligible for subsidies on a sliding scale to purchase insurance through the exchange. Those subsidies would ensure that people who make 150 percent of the poverty level would not have to pay more than 3 percent of their income in premiums, while those who make 400 percent of the poverty level could pay up to 12 percent of their income in premiums.

· Out-of-pocket expenses caps | New regulations would cap yearly out-of-pocket medical expenses for individuals at $5,000 and families at $10,000. Those who earn less than 400 percent of the poverty level would have lower caps, on a sliding scale.

· Tax surcharge | The bill would help pay for itself by imposing a 5.4 percent tax surcharge on individuals earning more than $500,000 per year and families earning more than $1 million.

· End-of-life counseling | The bill retains a controversial provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/health/july-dec09/billsummary_10-29.html

[BDB]

See, here is the thing. I used to really like Walter Williams. I would sit down and read his columns whenever they came out in my hometown newspaper at the breakfast table. My parents and I would usually discuss the editorials, go over strong points, and have a debate. My mom usually took the liberal side and my dad the conservative/Walter Williams side. Most of the time my dad carried the day, but my mom's arguments always seemd persuasive. But then one day I was shooting some b-ball outside of a school, and a couple of guys who were up to no good, started making trouble in my neighborhood. I got in one little fight and my mom got scared and said you're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air. I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said 'Fresh', and had dice in the mirror, If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought 'Nah, forget it - Yo, homes to Bel-Air!' I pulled up to the house at bout seven or eight, I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes, smell ya later!' I looked at my kingdom, I was finally there! To sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air!

frosh pronce
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/7986/1238540317479.jpg

[chhspantherfan]

frosh proncess :rolleyes:
http://www-tc.pbs.org/newshour/updates/new-imagebank/health/0729_pelosihealth.jpg

[BDB]

http://mestan.eu/bush/img52.jpg

volloge odiot

[chhspantherfan]

El Prez

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_eCBay0FmDos/SWLTIKeYJNI/AAAAAAAAEKk/vo2HXiMWM1s/s400/El+Prez.jpg

[RedRage00]

I simply commented that the post was funny. Still think it is. To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.

It was funny. I laughed, and got chewed out for it. :rolleyes: ;)

[BDB]

El Prez

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_eCBay0FmDos/SWLTIKeYJNI/AAAAAAAAEKk/vo2HXiMWM1s/s400/El+Prez.jpg

is that evidence, the rapper?

[GoOwls]

let's start here and i am sure the teeter-totter will go back and forth.

summary

· New regulations | New insurance industry regulations would prohibit insurers from rejecting customers based on pre-existing conditions. The regulations would also prohibit annual or lifetime caps on benefits.

· Insurance exchange | The bill would set up a new national health insurance exchange, a marketplace where individuals who do not have employer-sponsored insurance would be able to shop for plans. The exchange would also be open to small businesses, and more would be able to join each year. Companies with 25 or fewer employees would be able to join in 2013, companies with 50 or fewer employees could join in 2014, and companies with fewer than 100 employees could join by 2015.

· Public insurance option | The health insurance exchange would include a government-run public plan. Federal officials would negotiate payment rates with doctors and hospitals that accept the plan.

· Employer mandate | Employers with annual payrolls greater than $500,000 would be required to either provide health insurance for their employees, or contribute 8 percent of their payroll to a federal fund to help subsidize employees who purchase coverage through the exchange. Employers with payrolls less than $500,000 would be exempt from the mandate.

· Individual mandate | Individuals will be required to purchase health insurance, or pay a penalty fee. Some people would be eligible to apply for a hardship waiver.

· Medicaid expansion | Medicaid would be expanded to cover everyone whose income is below 150 percent of the poverty line, or about $33,000 per year for a family of four.

· Affordability subsidies | People who earn between 150 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level would be eligible for subsidies on a sliding scale to purchase insurance through the exchange. Those subsidies would ensure that people who make 150 percent of the poverty level would not have to pay more than 3 percent of their income in premiums, while those who make 400 percent of the poverty level could pay up to 12 percent of their income in premiums.

· Out-of-pocket expenses caps | New regulations would cap yearly out-of-pocket medical expenses for individuals at $5,000 and families at $10,000. Those who earn less than 400 percent of the poverty level would have lower caps, on a sliding scale.

· Tax surcharge | The bill would help pay for itself by imposing a 5.4 percent tax surcharge on individuals earning more than $500,000 per year and families earning more than $1 million.

· End-of-life counseling | The bill retains a controversial provision that allows Medicare to pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/health/july-dec09/billsummary_10-29.html

Whoa!!!!

The partisan meter just jumped off the page......are you seriously posting something from PBS and being non-partisan...seriously?

My God, PBS is certainly some things, but non-partisan is not one of them.

The National Endowment for the Arts is voted and funded by Congress....essentially.....PBS gets a bunch of operating cash from them.....can't bite the hand that feeds them, can they?

Name one true conservative that is regularly featured on either PBS TV or radio....if you do scoop up one, show when he/she was allowed to be relative.

PBS is just a step above MSNBC and the Daily Kos on the liberal scale.....just saying.

I do listen to NPR every once in a while....for as long as I can stand it.

Where are the criminality factors....where are the cost analysis....where is anything negative about the bill.....

My God, in almost 2000 pages, there has to be something negative....that should be your first clue as to how bogus that article is.

[E-Vol-ution]

Fact check is the balance.........Whoa!!!!

The partisan meter just jumped off the page......are you seriously posting something from PBS and being non-partisan...seriously?

My God, PBS is certainly some things, but non-partisan is not one of them.

The National Endowment for the Arts is voted and funded by Congress....essentially.....PBS gets a bunch of operating cash from them.....can't bite the hand that feeds them, can they?

Name one true conservative that is regularly featured on either PBS TV or radio....if you do scoop up one, show when he/she was allowed to be relative.

PBS is just a step above MSNBC and the Daily Kos on the liberal scale.....just saying.

I do listen to NPR every once in a while....for as long as I can stand it.

[chhspantherfan]

Fact check is the balance.........

guess he only thinks he knows me ;)

[GoOwls]

Fact check is the balance.........

Whose fact?
What check?
Whose balance?

NPR's?

PBS's?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[chhspantherfan]

Whose fact?
What check?
Whose balance?

NPR's?

PBS's?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

exactly, confused is expected. Listen, you need to read each side. I agree with you. But your methods are all wrong. It's like you have gone Postal or something:eek:;)

[pied]

Whoa!!!!

The partisan meter just jumped off the page......are you seriously posting something from PBS and being non-partisan...seriously?

...

Where are the criminality factors....where are the cost analysis....where is anything negative about the bill.....

My God, in almost 2000 pages, there has to be something negative....that should be your first clue as to how bogus that article is.


Kind of confirming your bias I think. This is a summary, not a detailed piece nor opinion piece. I assume there are many that find many things about this negative.

*Indivdual mandate
*surcharge on those earning $500k+
*Public option
*Employer mandate

Not certain what you are looking for in a summary, unless you clearly have an agenda. I think that part is plainly obvious.

[Favpack]

Will it cover Viagra?..... My "friend" wants to know. :cool:

[Favpack]

Did you read the article?

I skimmed it - fairly quickly. I've read Williams before and agree with about 80% of his take.

He also thinks he should be able to smoke anywhere he darned well pleases. I disa....cough....gree with this position entirely - and, frankly, it makes him look rather foolish for taking such a pro-smokers, 1970ish, stance.

[JagFan]

Mong

I gave up trying to discuss anything this administration is trying to do. They say they want free and open discussion but lock doors. They will cram this piece of crap down our throats and could care less what it does to the economy to me or my employees. They simply just want to say they did it. To hell with the consciousness. They know best what is good for the "little people" but won't put their own families on it. :rolleyes:

And to their leader our Mr. Cool President who won't turn away from the chance to show us how cool he is. Gives a speech and shows how cool he is giving his shout out to Dr. Medicine Crow. All while his soldiers are laying dead and wounded on the floor in Ft. Hood. Nope can't start with that to sad. Gotta show how cool I am and get those shout outs out first.

Pied I told you a year ago I would not vote for a Democrat for national office because of how they treat the military. Well he just put an exclamation point on my thoughts.

All I can do is pray and work for the 2010 and 2012 elections so these elitist idiots can be told to go home.

[SWMHebron]

Mong

I gave up trying to discuss anything this administration is trying to do. They say they want free and open discussion but lock doors. They will cram this piece of crap down our throats and could care less what it does to the economy to me or my employees. They simply just want to say they did it. To hell with the consciousness. They know best what is good for the "little people" but won't put their own families on it. :rolleyes:

And to their leader our Mr. Cool President who won't turn away from the chance to show us how cool he is. Gives a speech and shows how cool he is giving his shout out to Dr. Medicine Crow. All while his soldiers are laying dead and wounded on the floor in Ft. Hood. Nope can't start with that to sad. Gotta show how cool I am and get those shout outs out first.

Pied I told you a year ago I would not vote for a Democrat for national office because of how they treat the military. Well he just put an exclamation point on my thoughts.

All I can do is pray and work for the 2010 and 2012 elections so these elitist idiots can be told to go home.

:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy

[E-Vol-ution]

The organization that will give an unbiased answer regarding fact to any particular question or declaration made.
Example.....1) you feel any specific portion of the bill covers or doesn't cover something; you can pull it up. 2) A statement is made regarding the package or disputable point; you can pull it up.
3) If you just want to say something sucks but can't point out what specifically; you can look it up and no opinion will be there.........only the facts of the topic or claim.
Fact Check.
Best part of it all is you can quote and post what that truth or lie is with no one questioning your integrity.
Whose fact?
What check?
Whose balance?

NPR's?

PBS's?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[pied]

Pied I told you a year ago I would not vote for a Democrat for national office because of how they treat the military. Well he just put an exclamation point on my thoughts.



Did he do something to the military, or is this about healthcare? Not certain I understand that point.



From everything I have heard, this will die in the Senate. My guess is that it does just that, and then stays dead through the mid term elections and then for the 2012 ones as well. We'll be sitting in 10-15 years no closer, for better or worse, to a better health care program than we were 10-15 yaers ago.

[JagFan]

Did he do something to the military, or is this about healthcare? Not certain I understand that point.



From everything I have heard, this will die in the Senate. My guess is that it does just that, and then stays dead through the mid term elections and then for the 2012 ones as well. We'll be sitting in 10-15 years no closer, for better or worse, to a better health care program than we were 10-15 yaers ago.

Just part of the package that is this administration and how they treat people. Healthcare, dead and wounded soldiers, little people you know.

[pied]

Just part of the package that is this administration and how they treat people. Healthcare, dead and wounded soldiers, little people you know.

Did he do something to the wounded/kia? Must have missed that part, or just can't think of what you are referring to.

[JagFan]

Did he do something to the wounded/kia? Must have missed that part, or just can't think of what you are referring to.

The day of the Ft. Hood shooting he had a speech planned with the Indian Nation on healthcare. He had been told what was happening in Ft. Hood and decided to go to the speech anyway. When he came out he first gave his shout out to Dr. Medicine Crow (who wasn't even there) and said hi to his audience. Then he addressed the issue at Ft. Hood. His soldiers were dead and dying on the floor in Ft. Hood and he put his shout outs first. Beneath contempt in my book.

It was on the news and in print. Look it up. I watched live. Wanting to see what my President had to say during this horrible time. I got how cool he is.

[GoOwls]

Did he do something to the wounded/kia? Must have missed that part, or just can't think of what you are referring to.

After the shooting, Obama was supposed to make a statement about it. He was making a speech and yucking it up when he was officially cut to on the radio....he was laughing and having a ball courting his peeps....then he realized he was on air and changed his tune and got serious....the yuck session went on for about 1 1/2 minutes and in the light of what was going on, it was pretty sickening.....I was listening to it live....I listen to news, not talk, radio all day.....it was not flattering....but of course you won't hear of it on the networks, but if it had been Bush making a gaff like that, it would have been headlines.....but why am I telling you....you're his choir.

[BDB]

After the shooting, Obama was supposed to make a statement about it. He was making a speech and yucking it up when he was officially cut to on the radio....he was laughing and having a ball courting his peeps....then he realized he was on air and changed his tune and got serious....the yuck session went on for about 1 1/2 minutes and in the light of what was going on, it was pretty sickening.....I was listening to it live....I listen to news, not talk, radio all day.....it was not flattering....but of course you won't hear of it on the networks, but if it had been Bush making a gaff like that, it would have been headlines.....but why am I telling you....you're his choir.

link?

[JagFan]

link?

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html

[JagFan]

link?

http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=11460540

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/11/obama_calls_ft_hood_shootings.html

Want more?????

[BDB]

http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=11460540

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/11/obama_calls_ft_hood_shootings.html

Want more?????

1 minute 50? is that all it takes to be hated, now?

[JagFan]

1 minute 50? is that all it takes to be hated, now?

Not the point. We had a tragedy happening and he choose to make sure his cool shout outs happened first.

That's alright you don't have to agree that it was a slap in the face to Ft. Hood. I am sure you are cool too.:cool:

No hate just can't wait to send him home.

[pied]

JF/GO, thanks for the info. Was out of town/touch from Thur afternoon through yesterday afternoon. HAdn't sen that story.

[GoOwls]

link?

Not everything has a link, child, sometimes you have to just take a man at his word......kids.

[GoOwls]

JF/GO, thanks for the info. Was out of town/touch from Thur afternoon through yesterday afternoon. HAdn't sen that story.

No prob.....I was listening live and it shocked me how insensitive it was.....live, anyway......Bush would have been skewered.....:(

I didn't bother posting about it because I just figured that nobody would care what he did and someone would call me a liar and ask for a link.....the distrust gets old.

[BDB]

Not everything has a link, child, sometimes you have to just take a man at his word......kids.

i haven't watched the news in forever. i honestly hadn't heard the story still after jagfan sent the links (very rudely, might i add).

i guess i'm overly apathetic. 1:50 for a shout out doesn't seem that long, to me.

[chhspantherfan]

i haven't watched the news in forever. i honestly hadn't heard the story still after jagfan sent the links (very rudely, might i add).

i guess i'm overly apathetic. 1:50 for a shout out doesn't seem that long, to me.

the bigger issue is that as the leader of our country and the Commander in Chief, why was he not a little more subdued?

[BDB]

the bigger issue is that as the leader of our country and the Commander in Chief, why was he not a little more subdued?

he's all hopped up on mountain dew?

[SWMHebron]

he's all hopped up on mountain dew?

And then he'll scissor kick you in the back of the head.

[BDB]

And then he'll scissor kick you in the back of the head.

word.

[JagFan]

i haven't watched the news in forever. i honestly hadn't heard the story still after jagfan sent the links (very rudely, might i add).

i guess i'm overly apathetic. 1:50 for a shout out doesn't seem that long, to me.

What was rude about it? You complain that people don't discuss with original thought and complain that people only post stuff off the internet and then when I do say my own thoughts on what this man did you demand proof from the internet. So what do you want? I could have just posted the article and then you would have been very rude and posted some picture or said something rude about copy pasta stuff.

I am truly sorry if you found that rude, I find it appalling that the Commander in Chief has to show how cool he is while his troops are still laying in their own blood.

Ya, I will get rude and down right witchy (with a capital B) when people slap our military in the face and think it is ok. The only reason you can be rude to Go Owls and everyone else on here is because of their blood. Think about it.

I usually do like what you say Prez and have enjoyed many of our converstaions but dang make up your mind on what bugs ya. No internet and original thought or demand of the internet stuff. Pied just asked what we were talking about and we told him, very nicely I might add.:)

[BDB]

forgot the :p in the "rude" comment. my bad.

[JagFan]

forgot the :p in the "rude" comment. my bad.

Fine! :p:p ;)

[Mong Hu]

I simply commented that the post was funny. Still think it is. To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.

You found it funny because it is easy to laugh at those with whom you disagree. Further, I am not shocked to hear that you don't care to try and understand a point of view that is divergent from your own. You like to paint yourself as an open minded independent thinker as I suppose we all do but in reality the language of the above post and your prior comments would indicate to me that you are anything but what you present yourself to be. I have enjoyed reading many of the articles which you have posted I have found them thought provoking even if I did not agree with them.

The article I posted was not a discourse on my own political thought but a well written thoughtful article about the ever increasing role of government in our lives and the loss of liberty as a result of that increase.

In short the more you ask of government the more you are required to give to the government in order for the government to meet your demands on it. The more you give to the government of your own means earned through your labor the less ability you have to affect your own will in your life or the less you free you are. Do you agree or disagree? This was the question that interested me in the article and this is the question which to me should be at the heart of the health care debate in our country.

[JMSFan]

this is the yard, not the main statewide board. or are you unable to comprehend the english language? if you just want to discuss football, then GTFO of the yard.

:notworthy this

[Mong Hu]

Mong

I gave up trying to discuss anything this administration is trying to do. They say they want free and open discussion but lock doors. They will cram this piece of crap down our throats and could care less what it does to the economy to me or my employees. They simply just want to say they did it. To hell with the consciousness. They know best what is good for the "little people" but won't put their own families on it. :rolleyes:

And to their leader our Mr. Cool President who won't turn away from the chance to show us how cool he is. Gives a speech and shows how cool he is giving his shout out to Dr. Medicine Crow. All while his soldiers are laying dead and wounded on the floor in Ft. Hood. Nope can't start with that to sad. Gotta show how cool I am and get those shout outs out first.

Pied I told you a year ago I would not vote for a Democrat for national office because of how they treat the military. Well he just put an exclamation point on my thoughts.

All I can do is pray and work for the 2010 and 2012 elections so these elitist idiots can be told to go home.

I understand your frustration. I can not help myself, however, I have to discuss it. I have to try and further my own understanding in part because I have to try and make sure that my thoughts are clear. I have to make sure I understand what is going on so that I might better affect the world in which I live, the world in which my children are going to live. The more I understand about this administration and in fact today's Democratic, and for that matter Republican Party, the more I fear the direction that this country is taking. I fear the path of the Democrats more than the path of the Republicans for the time being I suppose. The idea that it is some how the governments job to take care of us is truly frightening to me.

I agree with your assessment of the liberal left in America believing that they know what is best for all of us uneducated, unenlightened slobs. I will never forget the conversation I had with one of my fellow educators who told me that if I were just a little more educated I would think like him. The arrogance is absolutely astounding. It is remarkable how similar this view is to the view held by the aristocracy who believed that the common man must be taken care of because he could not take care of himself. The aristocrats believed that it was their job to take care of those who could not take care of themselves. The enlightenment turned all of that on its head and yet we find ourselves reverting right back to it.

[Firebird]

Go ahead pied, bird, and red.....go ahead and be jerks....I don't want to hear one word when it goes bad.

You are having fun now and I get that....it's even funny....but there is a time to be serious and you are doing your fellow man a disservice by not being serious from time to time...there are people here who think you are for real.....don't lead them down that slippery slope...you 3 are better than that.

OK.....Ha-ha....there you go....you got your laugh...now grow up a bit.

http://cdn0.knowyourmeme.com/i/2190/original/orly.jpg

[JagFan]

I understand your frustration. I can not help myself, however, I have to discuss it. I have to try and further my own understanding in part because I have to try and make sure that my thoughts are clear. I have to make sure I understand what is going on so that I might better affect the world in which I live, the world in which my children are going to live. The more I understand about this administration and in fact today's Democratic, and for that matter Republican Party, the more I fear the direction that this country is taking. I fear the path of the Democrats more than the path of the Republicans for the time being I suppose. The idea that it is some how the governments job to take care of us is truly frightening to me.
I agree with your assessment of the liberal left in America believing that they know what is best for all of us uneducated, unenlightened slobs. I will never forget the conversation I had with one of my fellow educators who told me that if I were just a little more educated I would think like him. The arrogance is absolutely astounding. It is remarkable how similar this view is to the view held by the aristocracy who believed that the common man must be taken care of because he could not take care of himself. The aristocrats believed that it was their job to take care of those who could not take care of themselves. The enlightenment turned all of that on its head and yet we find ourselves reverting right back to it.

Scares me too. That goes against everything I have been taught about being independant and self sufficient. I do read a lot and try to stay up with what is happening because I do believe you cannot be agaist something if you do not understand it. My husband reminded me last year. He was watching TV and I asked if I could join him on the coach, he said yes. With the remote firmly in his hand he switched channels. He finally settled on CNN. After about 10 minutes I asked if I had been bad. He asked why and I said because he was making me watch CNN. He then pointed out that we will not know if we are right in our thinking if we do not know what the others are saying. Good point.

[pied]

You found it funny because it is easy to laugh at those with whom you disagree. - Sometimes I do, but that was truly funny.



Further, I am not shocked to hear that you don't care to try and understand a point of view that is divergent from your own. - Actually I like to read information with a different point of view from my own. What gets tiresome is the doom and gloom, anyone who is not a Conservative Rpublican is a Socialist Commie who hates America. If I have ever staetd that I am in favor of the Health care bill, on this board or anywhere, I would like to see it. What I am not in favor of, is being opposed to it, simply for being opposed to it.

It's not that far off of a statement, given Senator's DeMint's comments:

"If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,"

You like to paint yourself as an open minded independent thinker as I suppose we all do but in reality the language of the above post and your prior comments would indicate to me that you are anything but what you present yourself to be. I have enjoyed reading many of the articles which you have posted I have found them thought provoking even if I did not agree with them. - thanks. So I am not an independent thinker, because you're not. Good circular argument. nanny nanny boo boo to you as well.

The article I posted was not a discourse on my own political thought - Really, the thread title is Why I oppose health care reform in its current incarnation. huh....
but a well written thoughtful article about the ever increasing role of government in our lives and the loss of liberty as a result of that increase.

In short the more you ask of government the more you are required to give to the government in order for the government to meet your demands on it. The more you give to the government of your own means earned through your labor the less ability you have to affect your own will in your life or the less you free you are. Do you agree or disagree? This was the question that interested me in the article and this is the question which to me should be at the heart of the health care debate in our country.

I am not asking more of the government . My comments are typically based on me being fed up with my fellow conservatives. I think I am allowed that right.

[JagFan]

I am not asking more of the government . My comments are typically based on me being fed up with my fellow conservatives. I think I am allowed that right.

Communication is a two way street. And we certainly do have the right to oppose this stuff they are putting together.

So please don't try to say the libs have been open for ideas and it is only conservatives that are obstinate. We haven't had the locks changed on any doors.

I am not opposed to some healthcare reform but my ideas and thoughts when expressed by conservatives have been laughed at and told to go away. We are locked out.

[pied]

Communication is a two way street. And we certainly do have the right to oppose this stuff they are putting together.

So please don't try to say the libs have been open for ideas and it is only conservatives that are obstinate. We haven't had the locks changed on any doors.

I am not opposed to some healthcare reform but my ideas and thoughts when expressed by conservatives have been laughed at and told to go away. We are locked out.

Not saying that at all, but I think that statement is what pisses me off about my party more than anything. Why is it not possible to say that we are focusing on the wrong thing or that we are wrong or have issues without bringing the hated "libs" or state run media into it?

THAT'S MY PROBLEM.

[pied]

It's like talking to my nine year old.

Me- "Hey honey, please watch your arm? It's sitting in gravy."
Her- "Yeah, but the three year old has jelly on his face"

awesome

[JagFan]

Not saying that at all, but I think that statement is what pisses me off about my party more than anything. Why is it not possible to say that we are focusing on the wrong thing or that we are wrong or have issues without bringing the hated "libs" or state run media into it?

THAT'S MY PROBLEM.

Because those are the obsticles to conservatives getting their ideas and voices heard.

I have said they are focusing on the wrong thing and get accused of hate. No hate just want to be heard.

[pied]

Because those are the obsticles to conservatives getting their ideas and voices heard.

I have said they are focusing on the wrong thing and get accused of hate. No hate just want to be heard.

So they weren't obstacles in 80/84/88/00/04?

How about when the R's held both houses of Congress? Why now do we have to refer to "libs" when dealing with internal issues?

[slcdragonfan]

Hmmmm. A Republican President from 1980 to 1992 and then from 2000 to 2008. A Republican Congress from 1992 or so to 2006. Where were the ideas for healthcare reform during that time? Last I saw it was a Democrat that presented ideas and got them shot down (deservedly so) by....Repubs/Conservatives of which I was one. When was the last time that a REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVE presented anything other than deregulation, which translated meant NO regulation and typically higher fees/failed industry (savings and loan, financial industry, etc)?

How about........never? ;)

Here's the problem: Conservatives/Repubs NOW want a say supposedly, but they had the opportunity to go down and score with their own plan. Unfortunately, it was not an issue for them.

[JagFan]

Hmmmm. A Republican President from 1980 to 1992 and then from 2000 to 2008. A Republican Congress from 1992 or so to 2006. Where were the ideas for healthcare reform during that time? Last I saw it was a Democrat that presented ideas and got them shot down (deservedly so) by....Repubs/Conservatives of which I was one. When was the last time that a REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVE presented anything other than deregulation, which translated meant NO regulation and typically higher fees/failed industry (savings and loan, financial industry, etc)?

How about........never? ;)

Here's the problem: Conservatives/Repubs NOW want a say supposedly, but they had the opportunity to go down and score with their own plan. Unfortunately, it was not an issue for them.

Is was an issue and it was shot down. Just because you don't think they were the best ideas that does not mean they were not tried.

I too am tired of everyone on capital hill having their own adjenda and putting us "little people" last. I am not for a public option, I am not for fining people who do not have insurance, I am not for paying for abortions, I am not for telling companies that their insurance they offer is not enough so here we will make you pay for this, I am not for paying for illegal aliens. (they do get care now, it is called the ER). This is my right. I do feel it will hurt America and it will not be self sufficient any more than social security is.

I am not saying the Republicans have done any better, just don't lock the doors on them and their ideas. What is wrong with starting with smaller changes and going from there. Why do we need to change the whole system? Let's keep what is good and see where changes are needed. LEt's be open and transparent(Obama and Pelosi's words) about the process. Why late night votes and locked door meetings. I don't trust anyone up there right now to have my interest at heart.

[JagFan]

So they weren't obstacles in 80/84/88/00/04?

How about when the R's held both houses of Congress? Why now do we have to refer to "libs" when dealing with internal issues?

Then it was the Repub. not listening to the libs and now they feel they have to show their strength. It is a vicious circle that Washington is in and we pay the price.

I am talking about what is happening now in Washington not what happened in the past and the leaders are Obama, Reid and Pelosi.

[pied]

Then it was the Repub. not listening to the libs and now they feel they have to show their strength. It is a vicious circle that Washington is in and we pay the price.

I am talking about what is happening now in Washington not what happened in the past and the leaders are Obama, Reid and Pelosi.

It seems to me that many on this board are happy to play along with the game simply blaming the other side, calling each other names.

[JagFan]

It seems to me that many on this board are happy to play along with the game simply blaming the other side, calling each other names.

I agree that is one reason I have not posted in the yard (on politics) very often lately. But it is true of both sides. I do not think one side is any better than the other in that area.

[slcdragonfan]

I agree that is one reason I have not posted in the yard (on politics) very often lately. But it is true of both sides. I do not think one side is any better than the other in that area.

+1

All of it, including posting in the yard. I agree on most of the other points you made in a previous post as well.

I only wanted to comment that we have needed some form of healthcare reform for over 20 years, and during that time nothing was proffered. When my Brother-in-law goes $20,000 in debt because he had a diabetic seizure and had no health insurance because a. he had lost his job and b. could not get coverage (he was a diabetic after all), and then as he struggles to pay that debt it is handed over to a collection company with 25% interest and his wages are garnered when he DOES get a job, something is wrong. There are many other issues. I am NOT saying this bill is the best, but if the folks on the conservative side cared at all about this issue perhaps they might have presented some reform before having their hand forced?

I have to reiterate: I am a "compassionate conservative" to borrow a previous President's phrase. But I am fed up. In fact with both sides. I wish we had a third party, I have voted that route 3 times in my life.

[JagFan]

+1

All of it, including posting in the yard. I agree on most of the other points you made in a previous post as well.

I only wanted to comment that we have needed some form of health care reform for over 20 years, and during that time nothing was proffered. When my Brother-in-law goes $20,000 in debt because he had a diabetic seizure and had no health insurance because a. he had lost his job and b. could not get coverage (he was a diabetic after all), and then as he struggles to pay that debt it is handed over to a collection company with 25% interest and his wages are garnered when he DOES get a job, something is wrong. There are many other issues. I am NOT saying this bill is the best, but if the folks on the conservative side cared at all about this issue perhaps they might have presented some reform before having their hand forced?

I have to reiterate: I am a "compassionate conservative" to borrow a previous President's phrase. But I am fed up. In fact with both sides. I wish we had a third party, I have voted that route 3 times in my life.

I am not opposed to health care reform. I do think we need to look at Tort reform and have the AMA yank the licenses of physicians that cannot cut it. Get very firm on this. I also like opening up the state lines in the area of insurance. I review our companies policy every year. I get competing quotes and call. Most have lowered our overall premiums to keep our business if even by a little. The problem is they know in Texas they are all charging in the same ballpark. Open up the competition. Third have pools were people with preexisting conditions or people paying for their own can pool together and get better rates and insurance. Have some government help with the area of preexisting conditions. Not opposed to that at all. I also think if you take the insurance out of employers hands and have people buy thier own then the premiums will go down and you are not held by your employer for your health insurance coverage that can be canceled because you and the employer have parted ways.

There is a lot that can be done without the fines and public option.

I just wish some common sense and courtesy would come to Washington.

[slcdragonfan]

I am not opposed to health care reform. I do think we need to look at Tort reform and have the AMA yank the licenses of physicians that cannot cut it. Get very firm on this. I also like opening up the state lines in the area of insurance. I review our companies policy every year. I get competing quotes and call. Most have lowered our overall premiums to keep our business if even by a little. The problem is they know in Texas they are all charging in the same ballpark. Open up the competition. Third have pools were people with preexisting conditions or people paying for their own can pool together and get better rates and insurance. Have some government help with the area of preexisting conditions. Not opposed to that at all. I also think if you take the insurance out of employers hands and have people buy thier own then the premiums will go down and you are not held by your employer for your health insurance coverage that can be canceled because you and the employer have parted ways.

There is a lot that can be done without the fines and public option.

I just wish some common sense and courtesy would come to Washington.

Agree, with almost if not all again. You are making all good points. I will simply reiterate, where were our elected officials on this issue up until Jan, 2009? No one wanted to deal with this issue. but we had burning the flag amendments, gay marriage amendments, gays in the military noise, blahblahblah. That is why the Republican party has lost the moderate vote and THAT has resulted in a more liberal approach than many of us might have wanted, because the Democrats/liberals actually wanted to do something.

[E-Vol-ution]

I am in agreement with this post.......
many disagree with this package because it isn't exactly how they'd like it to be, but the reality is something had to be done about what's been happening to a majority of our citizens.
Nothing but time has passed...and quite frankly prior administrations avoided addressing major controversial public needs that also had a negative financial impact on our major privates.
It's like a vehicle you invest in that needs repair and tweaking but still works. The only thing more screwed up is not having a vehicle at all.
+1

All of it, including posting in the yard. I agree on most of the other points you made in a previous post as well.

I only wanted to comment that we have needed some form of healthcare reform for over 20 years, and during that time nothing was proffered. When my Brother-in-law goes $20,000 in debt because he had a diabetic seizure and had no health insurance because a. he had lost his job and b. could not get coverage (he was a diabetic after all), and then as he struggles to pay that debt it is handed over to a collection company with 25% interest and his wages are garnered when he DOES get a job, something is wrong. There are many other issues. I am NOT saying this bill is the best, but if the folks on the conservative side cared at all about this issue perhaps they might have presented some reform before having their hand forced?

I have to reiterate: I am a "compassionate conservative" to borrow a previous President's phrase. But I am fed up. In fact with both sides. I wish we had a third party, I have voted that route 3 times in my life.

[JagFan]

Agree, with almost if not all again. You are making all good points. I will simply reiterate, where were our elected officials on this issue up until Jan, 2009? No one wanted to deal with this issue. but we had burning the flag amendments, gay marriage amendments, gays in the military noise, blahblahblah. That is why the Republican party has lost the moderate vote and THAT has resulted in a more liberal approach than many of us might have wanted, because the Democrats/liberals actually wanted to do something.

I agree. I have not been happy with many Republicans for awhile now. And yes I have voiced my concerns to Dr. Burgess and our two senators. All replied but only Dr. Burgess impressed me with his response.

I think we will see a huge difference next year in the election, at least we will if they are listening.

[slcdragonfan]

I agree. I have not been happy with many Republicans for awhile now. And yes I have voiced my concerns to Dr. Burgess and our two senators. All replied but only Dr. Burgess impressed me with his response.

I think we will see a huge difference next year in the election, at least we will if they are listening.

I got canned responses from our two Senators when I wrote them, and they used my email as an opportunity to harvest it and send me nonsense. :rolleyes:

Same thing when I was in Oklahoma except for one Congressman. Inhofe is an idiot, but Istook is a true conservative with his beliefs. Him I respected but disagreed with..he sent em a personal reply addressing my issue. Disagreeing with me, but dealing with it.

Anyway, back to the playoffs....;)

[JagFan]

I got canned responses from our two Senators when I wrote them, and they used my email as an opportunity to harvest it and send me nonsense. :rolleyes:

Same thing when I was in Oklahoma except for one Congressman. Inhofe is an idiot, but Istook is a true conservative with his beliefs. Him I respected but disagreed with..he sent em a personal reply addressing my issue. Disagreeing with me, but dealing with it.

Anyway, back to the playoffs....;)

You betcha;) Thanks for listening while I vented. I feel better now.:)

[Mong Hu]

You found it funny because it is easy to laugh at those with whom you disagree. - Sometimes I do, but that was truly funny.

Further, I am not shocked to hear that you don't care to try and understand a point of view that is divergent from your own. - Actually I like to read information with a different point of view from my own. What gets tiresome is the doom and gloom, anyone who is not a Conservative Rpublican is a Socialist Commie who hates America. If I have ever staetd that I am in favor of the Health care bill, on this board or anywhere, I would like to see it. What I am not in favor of, is being opposed to it, simply for being opposed to it.

It's not that far off of a statement, given Senator's DeMint's comments:

"If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,"

You like to paint yourself as an open minded independent thinker as I suppose we all do but in reality the language of the above post and your prior comments would indicate to me that you are anything but what you present yourself to be. I have enjoyed reading many of the articles which you have posted I have found them thought provoking even if I did not agree with them. - thanks. So I am not an independent thinker, because you're not. Good circular argument. nanny nanny boo boo to you as well.

The article I posted was not a discourse on my own political thought - Really, the thread title is Why I oppose health care reform in its current incarnation. huh....
but a well written thoughtful article about the ever increasing role of government in our lives and the loss of liberty as a result of that increase.

In short the more you ask of government the more you are required to give to the government in order for the government to meet your demands on it. The more you give to the government of your own means earned through your labor the less ability you have to affect your own will in your life or the less you free you are. Do you agree or disagree? This was the question that interested me in the article and this is the question which to me should be at the heart of the health care debate in our country.

I am not asking more of the government . My comments are typically based on me being fed up with my fellow conservatives. I think I am allowed that right.


Pied I did not in my original post speak of conservative or liberal. The term liberal is mentioned only once in the article which I linked and the term conservative is not used at all. Is there doom and gloom? The man is attempting to sound an alarm about the threat large government presents to individual liberty which I think is fair. No one was called a socialist commie in the article nor in my original post.

The reason I posted the link was in fact to explain my opposition. I am not in favor of being opposed to anything for the sake of being opposed to it either, thus the link. I oppose the current health care reform package because I think it represents exactly the type of expansion of government described in the article as a threat to individual liberty. Perhaps you do not think that the government stepping in to insure some 45 million Americans through a public option (which is what the bill does) represents an expansion of government but to me it clearly does. Further it is clear to me that the intent of the public option is to move the country eventually to a single payer government run system, but perhaps you are not sure that this represents an expansion of government either.

My assertion that you are not an open minded independent thinker is not a circular argument at all. I pointed out that you like to think of yourself as open minded and have painted yourself that way on more than one occasion on this board. I pointed out that we all like to think of ourselves that way and present ourselves in that light. I did not go on to say that you are not open minded because I am not but rather that laughing at people with whom you disagree is not indicative of having an open mind, of seriously considering opposing views.

The most strikingly closed minded portion of your previous posts was the following:
What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.
Here you state that what I have posted simply reinforces the common mindset in the Republican party and then go on to say that you have not even read the article. It is the most closed minded and prejudiced statement I have read on this board and I certainly would not have expected it from you.

You say that you are fed up with conservatives who call people liberals (or libs), a term which they, the liberals themselves, originally adopted to describe themselves (now its progressive because no one likes liberals anymore) but yet you are more than willing to laugh right along with those who make light of conservatives for expressing their views. I find this to be disturbing and hypocritical.

Pied, you voted for Obama. Through your vote for President Obama and his policies you are in fact asking for more of the government. I am sorry, but your vote, your actions, speak just as much if not more than anything you have said on this board.

[slcdragonfan]

...
Pied, you voted for Obama. Through your vote for President Obama and his policies you are in fact asking for more of the government. I am sorry, but your vote, your actions, speak just as much if not more than anything you have said on this board.

Hmmm. So, a vote for Ronald Reagan was a vote for.....deregulation of the savings and loan industry, resulting in their collapse? A vote for Ronald Reagan was a vote for...Iran/Contra? A vote for Clinton was a vote for... Monica? A vote for Bush was a vote for a misrepresentation resulting in an attack on Iraq? A vote for J. McCain was a vote for....?

No, If A THEN B does not work here. A vote for Obama in many ways was like voting for McCain, voting for a change in how things were done in Washington. Unfortunately, the more conservative wing of the Republican party did not like nor trust McCain, I believe because they couldn't control him. Thus his opportunity was squandered trying to solidify his party rather than reaching out to the moderates and remaining his maverick self.

[Mong Hu]

Hmmm. So, a vote for Ronald Reagan was a vote for.....deregulation of the savings and loan industry, resulting in their collapse? A vote for Ronald Reagan was a vote for...Iran/Contra? A vote for Clinton was a vote for... Monica? A vote for Bush was a vote for a misrepresentation resulting in an attack on Iraq? A vote for J. McCain was a vote for....?

No, If A THEN B does not work here. A vote for Obama in many ways was like voting for McCain, voting for a change in how things were done in Washington. Unfortunately, the more conservative wing of the Republican party did not like nor trust McCain, I believe because they couldn't control him. Thus his opportunity was squandered trying to solidify his party rather than reaching out to the moderates and remaining his maverick self.

Yes a vote for Ronald Reagan was a vote for deregulation. Reagan campaigned on a platform which called for less government, less regulation, a platform based on the idea that we could decide better for ourselves what was best for us than could government. It may not have been an issue which was important to you, you may have voted for him for some other reason but your vote was still a vote for deregulation, for less government. You can hear it in almost any speech the man gave. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x59wNGHe6iI Your vote helped make the deregulation of the savings and loan industry possible. You lent your voice to his cause through your vote.

A vote for Clinton was in fact a vote for Moncia. You knew, or should have if you paid attention at all, that the man was a womanizer. You voted for him and so your vote made that possible and you new that it made it possible before you voted. Again you may have voted for Clinton for some other reason, no one votes for someone because they are a womanizer (or at least there are probably not very many who do) but none the less your vote for someone whom you knew to be a womanizer is a vote that makes that type of situation a greater possibility.

In the same manner a vote for Obama was a vote for bigger, stronger, more active government. Obama was clear that he felt government should be doing more. Obama was clear that he wanted universal health care and further that he was a proponent of a single payer system. By voting for the man you are voting for him and all that he stands for not just one part or another. Granted it may be his stance on the war or some other such issue that makes him an appealing candidate to one person or another and not his stance on our government's role in society but none the less by voting for him you get the entire package. You can not vote for part of a candidate.

Yes every vote last year was a vote for change. Neither candidate was George W. Bush. But the two were not the same, a vote for McCain was not like a vote for Obama. The changes they proposed were not the same.

Change was really such a hollow slogan. It said nothing that was not obvious and really did not establish, in any clear way, what the candidate was about other than to define it in the negative. (I am about something that is not the last guy) Great so how are you different? Telling me that your different really doesn't say much.

[pied]

Pied I did not in my original post speak of conservative or liberal. The term liberal is mentioned only once in the article which I linked and the term conservative is not used at all. Is there doom and gloom? The man is attempting to sound an alarm about the threat large government presents to individual liberty which I think is fair. No one was called a socialist commie in the article nor in my original post. - In my original post, I simply acknowledged that Firebird's post was funny. It was very funny in fact.

The reason I posted the link was in fact to explain my opposition. I am not in favor of being opposed to anything for the sake of being opposed to it either, thus the link. I oppose the current health care reform package because I think it represents exactly the type of expansion of government described in the article as a threat to individual liberty. Perhaps you do not think that the government stepping in to insure some 45 million Americans through a public option (which is what the bill does) represents an expansion of government but to me it clearly does. Further it is clear to me that the intent of the public option is to move the country eventually to a single payer government run system, but perhaps you are not sure that this represents an expansion of government either. - Awesome. Thanks fortaking the time to explain.

My assertion that you are not an open minded independent thinker is not a circular argument at all. I pointed out that you like to think of yourself as open minded and have painted yourself that way on more than one occasion on this board. I pointed out that we all like to think of ourselves that way and present ourselves in that light. I did not go on to say that you are not open minded because I am not but rather that laughing at people with whom you disagree is not indicative of having an open mind, of seriously considering opposing views. - With whom do I disagree? Who was I laughing at? The Fresh Prince of Bel Air?

The most strikingly closed minded portion of your previous posts was the following:

Here you state that what I have posted simply reinforces the common mindset in the Republican party and then go on to say that you have not even read the article. It is the most closed minded and prejudiced statement I have read on this board and I certainly would not have expected it from you. - Super. I take it back, many Republican/Conservative pundits and those who listen to them don't simply blast Obama/the Administration for being....... well the opposition. I defer to Senator Demint:

"If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,"

You say that you are fed up with conservatives who call people liberals (or libs), a term which they, the liberals themselves, originally adopted to describe themselves (now its progressive because no one likes liberals anymore) but yet you are more than willing to laugh right along with those who make light of conservatives for expressing their views. I find this to be disturbing and hypocritical. - Do you know Firebird's political leanings? Who did he vote for inthe last election? Mine? This is the problem I have with the party at this point. It has gone to such a "the other people are the boogey-men mentality it has turned me off.

When people use terms like "libs" or liberal media, are you suggesting they are doing so in a positive way?

Pied, you voted for Obama. Through your vote for President Obama and his policies you are in fact asking for more of the government. I am sorry, but your vote, your actions, speak just as much if not more than anything you have said on this board.

thanks

[BDB]

http://www.evanevanevan.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/fresh-prince-of-bel-air-will-smith.jpg

[GoOwls]

thanks

nm

[GoOwls]

thanks

I you seemed as concerned with the negative, nasty labels that the liberals put on conservatives, christians, and southerners, (Bill Mahre show, for instance) you would be relevant....you don't and you aren't...just a wannabe mugwump who is just a hypocrite instead.

[Firebird]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/channelsurfing/uploaded_images/freshprince-782862.jpg

[pied]

I you seemed as concerned with the negative, nasty labels that the liberals put on conservatives, christians, and southerners, (Bill Mahre show, for instance) you would be relevant....you don't and you aren't...just a wannabe mugwump who is just a hypocrite instead.

Once again, I don't watch Bill Maher or John Stewart or Keith Olbermann. I've heard enough of them to dismiss them. In addition they don't support my side/point of view.

Heres an analogy that may or may not work.

If I go to a Texas/ou game and am heckled with weak smack talk from sooner fans I dismiss it as them being dumb. It may annoy me but it doesn't surprise me or affect me in any meaningful way. On the other hand, if I see a bunch of Texas fans acting inappropriately, cursing at kids/old women, cheering players as they are removed on a stretcher, etc. I will be embarrased.

If it continues to happen and the leaders and key supporters are vocal inthat way, it would wear on me and may drive me away eventually.

Lucky for me, we have Mack.

[GoOwls]

Once again, I don't watch Bill Maher or John Stewart or Keith Olbermann. I've heard enough of them to dismiss them. In addition they don't support my side/point of view.

Heres an analogy that may or may not work.

If I go to a Texas/ou game and am heckled with weak smack talk from sooner fans I dismiss it as them being dumb. It may annoy me but it doesn't surprise me or affect me in any meaningful way. On the other hand, if I see a bunch of Texas fans acting inappropriately, cursing at kids/old women, cheering players as they are removed on a stretcher, etc. I will be embarrased.

If it continues to happen and the leaders and key supporters are vocal inthat way, it would wear on me and may drive me away eventually.

Lucky for me, we have Mack.

Good analogy, except that thoise fans have no bearing on your life.....you constantly running down conservatives and ignoring the liberals makes you appear liberal.....just like if you ignored the Sooners, but got after the Horns fans.....everybody would assume you are a Sooner.

IF, and I emphasize IF, you are a conservative, you do more harm by giving the liberals a pass...at least be fair....I criticize conservatives....I got all over McCain.....be a complete politico, not a half-azzer.

[RedRage00]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/channelsurfing/uploaded_images/freshprince-782862.jpg

Quick, someone do the Carlton!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_x8ZMOiXKoR8/SpR6UCbX9xI/AAAAAAAAAkc/CHBqnBCy_W4/s400/Carlton_Fresh_Prince_of_Bel_Air_290x400.jpg

[pied]

Good analogy, except that thoise fans have no bearing on your life.....you constantly running down conservatives and ignoring the liberals makes you appear liberal.....just like if you ignored the Sooners, but got after the Horns fans.....everybody would assume you are a Sooner.

IF, and I emphasize IF, you are a conservative, you do more harm by giving the liberals a pass...at least be fair....I criticize conservatives....I got all over McCain.....be a complete politico, not a half-azzer.

Good point, if people like Rush Limbaugh/Michael savage/Sean Hannity have anything to do with my life any more that ou fans.

If you could point to where I have run down McCain/etc(with the possible exception of DeMint) I would like to see it. Likely the closest you are going to find is me comparing their policies to other candidates/officials.

[BDB]

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/lulzul/GODDOMOTFRONK.jpg

[lonny23]

While I do not agree with every political and economic belief of the author much of what he says presents well my thoughts and concerns regarding the current health care debate. The article is worth a read if you have time and care to engage in deeper thought about the relationship of liberty and property rights. I realize that many do not care to engage in political discussions on the board but we have just finished our playoff run up here in the frozen north (we lost in the second round on a failed 2 point conversion with 17 seconds left in the game) and I need some distraction from my woes and sorrows. So if you do not wish to engage in this type of discussion please move to another thread. This is, after all, the yard and politics is just as off topic as "Man Law". If you would care to read the article and comment then by all means enjoy.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=09
I had a feeling he was going to say what I've been saying for a long time. I delicately broached this subject with my mom over the weekend. She was griping about the House passing health care reform and how it would kill older people. My parents are 63 and 68, but my stance is the only people who should be getting government health care are those who actually work/worked for the federal government and I've said for a long time we should have a lot less government workers. I'm a Constitution guy and still say we're supposed to pay for defense, but very little else that we spend so much money on with failed government control.

I laugh at the people who argue Pro-Republican and Pro-Democrat because neither side is much different than each other and both contribute greatly to the downfall of the country.

He sure was right when he said we're selfish people in our political views. It's all about what we can get for ourselves and not what's best for the country. That's why we need elected officials, but corruption ruins that. On the other hand, I question the sanity of the masses hating lawyers, but electing them to office.

By the way, the guys in office know most of the country and most of the posters on this board are idiots when it comes to their political views. That's why they run political races the way they do. The public has the whip when it comes to elections, but we don't crack the whip and make people act right. If we told them their jobs depended on cutting out the nonsense, they'd do it because their main goal is to stay elected. As it is, they accomplish very little for their salaries. I sit here and think about how long it takes them to pass legislation (Most of which is illegal according to the Constitution to start with) and how the guys and gals in the House (Integral to any legislation) have to spend most of every 2-year term running for re-election.

Our party system is for the dogs. Everybody is like a blood brother tying their support to others to get the same thing in return. I'd much rather have guys break with the party on what they think is right and wrong. Very few do.

Special interest groups are for the dogs, just as the unions and everybody else asking for a handout. I wish our governments would give all of 'em a big middle finger saying "We're going to do what's best and right, not what you want."

My problem with the whole deal is we're so accustomed to socialism that most people cry bloody murder the minute the gravy train stops. I liked the analogy about houses, but here is where it hits home for me:

I'll take better care of my parents than the government will.

Everybody will work harder to make money if they knew the government wouldn't give it to them for free. This whole welfare system and taking money from the rich always makes people try less because you can't get ahead.

I'm all about the harder working and smarter people getting ahead. Competition is good.

Our country was perfectly fine before the government started controlling schools. If unions can get auto workers $80 a hour, then I'm not going to feel bad when they lose their job. The deal with everything is money rules. The people who give money to politicians get what they want and that doesn't make a lick of difference between the 2 main parties.

We don't even need all of these safety regulatory agencies we have with the massive communication networks of today. If McDonalds is making everybody sick with their food, we're going to tell the world and they'll lose customers. If John Deere is unsafe, nobody will work there. I could care less about unsafe work environments. If a person chooses to work in an unsafe work environment, it's on them and they know the risks. Nobody makes a person work in the mine. Either they take the job with the risks or go elsewhere. I know it can get crazy and companies all collude to be unsafe, but my point is people take jobs knowing the risks. I know I might have to die because I'm in the military.

I could rant on, but my deal is 'ol boy is right about how we've torn apart the Constitution and the founding principles of this country and most people don't even realize it.

[BDB]

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff118/rndmsk8r/wallsmath.jpg

wall smath

[lonny23]

I am unclear as to how this comment is intended. Is the intent of your comment the same as your intent in http://forums.5atexasfootball.com/showthread.php?t=59193 post #4? If this your intent then I think it is a rather childish response to a well thought out argument on the nature and role of our government. I don't mind that you don't want to participate in the discussion or that you disagree with the assertions in the article I offered. But there is no reason to trivialize either those who wish to have a discussion or the arguments of Mr Williams which have been presented in a thoughtful and intelligent manner.

If on the other hand you in fact believe that the story of Walter Williams, a minority professor (both racially and ideologically), who has achieved great success in the academic world and who has consistently come to conclusions that differ from those of many of his peers and yet has effectively advocated for his minority opinions is in fact a compelling story then we are in agreement.

Unfortunately I have a hunch that the former rather than the later is the more accurate description of your intent (I hope I am wrong). Have you just given up on open honest discussion amongst those with divergent opinions? I thought you made a living in a place that is supposed to foster these kinds of discussions not trivialize them?Hey, I'm 100% on board with a minority that doesn't tow the Democratic line. I think the blatant lock-step approach of minorities for the same party is one the ultimate examples of stupidity. I pretty much hate the party system anyway because it takes away from doing the right things.

[lonny23]

Go ahead pied, bird, and red.....go ahead and be jerks....I don't want to hear one word when it goes bad.

You are having fun now and I get that....it's even funny....but there is a time to be serious and you are doing your fellow man a disservice by not being serious from time to time...there are people here who think you are for real.....don't lead them down that slippery slope...you 3 are better than that.

OK.....Ha-ha....there you go....you got your laugh...now grow up a bit.
No, I don't think they're better than that.

[pied]

No, I don't think they're better than that.

Thanks.

Any more dreams lately?

[lonny23]

I simply commented that the post was funny. Still think it is. To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.
I'll give you a non-partisan view of heath care:

1. Is health care benefits for most cases the best?
2. Is even more health care the best?

NEITHER! People need to fend for themselves. If I work X number of years for a company, I should get some benefits and eventually a retirement. If I work for a good company, I might get or even deserve health benefits after I retire. We all know we can't work/don't feel like working/can't work like the days of old when we get older. That means we either need to save up for our retirement or have family/friends take care of us. At no point is it the government's job to give us health care.

This social security stuff is garbage, too. They take our money that we work for to redistribute to us (After making money off of it), but they're also giving money to those who don't pay. If you look at government spending, it's mostly wasted money and a lot of social security money gets spent on other stuff.

He's right when he says the government is legal thieves.

Charity should come from us and our contributions to the church (If everybody would give their 10%), not the government. We have CFC (In the Air Force) for charities each year and you should see the overhead % for some companies and how little money goes for its intended purposes.

[pied]

I'll give you a non-partisan view of heath care:

1. Is health care benefits for most cases the best?
2. Is even more health care the best?

NEITHER! People need to fend for themselves. If I work X number of years for a company, I should get some benefits and eventually a retirement. If I work for a good company, I might get or even deserve health benefits after I retire. We all know we can't work/don't feel like working/can't work like the days of old when we get older. That means we either need to save up for our retirement or have family/friends take care of us. At no point is it the government's job to give us health care.

This social security stuff is garbage, too. They take our money that we work for to redistribute to us (After making money off of it), but they're also giving money to those who don't pay. If you look at government spending, it's mostly wasted money and a lot of social security money gets spent on other stuff.

He's right when he says the government is legal thieves.

Charity should come from us and our contributions to the church (If everybody would give their 10%), not the government. We have CFC (In the Air Force) for charities each year and you should see the overhead % for some companies and how little money goes for its intended purposes.


Honestly I really don't know what a lot of this means, but I'll give it a shot.

A non-driver is hurt in an auto accident, without their ID/healthcard, and the paramedics arrive at the scene. Do they treat or wait until they know the person is insured?


Or in this case are there no paramedics because they weren't discussed in the Constitution?

[lonny23]

I skimmed it - fairly quickly. I've read Williams before and agree with about 80% of his take.

He also thinks he should be able to smoke anywhere he darned well pleases. I disa....cough....gree with this position entirely - and, frankly, it makes him look rather foolish for taking such a pro-smokers, 1970ish, stance.
Although, I generally take the stance of limited government, I do have to come back to some regulations for the health and well being of the general public.

[JagFan]

Once again, I don't watch Bill Maher or John Stewart or Keith Olbermann. I've heard enough of them to dismiss them. In addition they don't support my side/point of view.

Heres an analogy that may or may not work.

If I go to a Texas/ou game and am heckled with weak smack talk from sooner fans I dismiss it as them being dumb. It may annoy me but it doesn't surprise me or affect me in any meaningful way. On the other hand, if I see a bunch of Texas fans acting inappropriately, cursing at kids/old women, cheering players as they are removed on a stretcher, etc. I will be embarrased.

If it continues to happen and the leaders and key supporters are vocal inthat way, it would wear on me and may drive me away eventually.

Lucky for me, we have Mack.

And yet you have called people idiots several times in different places on this board.
Casting stones when you are guilty of the same behavior is a hypocrite. Love ya Pied but please don't look down your nose at some that call names like you do not. You do.

[slcdragonfan]

Yes a vote for Ronald Reagan was a vote for deregulation. Reagan campaigned on a platform which called for less government, less regulation, a platform based on the idea that we could decide better for ourselves what was best for us than could government. It may not have been an issue which was important to you, you may have voted for him for some other reason but your vote was still a vote for deregulation, for less government. You can hear it in almost any speech the man gave. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x59wNGHe6iI Your vote helped make the deregulation of the savings and loan industry possible. You lent your voice to his cause through your vote.

A vote for Clinton was in fact a vote for Moncia. You knew, or should have if you paid attention at all, that the man was a womanizer. You voted for him and so your vote made that possible and you new that it made it possible before you voted. Again you may have voted for Clinton for some other reason, no one votes for someone because they are a womanizer (or at least there are probably not very many who do) but none the less your vote for someone whom you knew to be a womanizer is a vote that makes that type of situation a greater possibility.

In the same manner a vote for Obama was a vote for bigger, stronger, more active government. Obama was clear that he felt government should be doing more. Obama was clear that he wanted universal health care and further that he was a proponent of a single payer system. By voting for the man you are voting for him and all that he stands for not just one part or another. Granted it may be his stance on the war or some other such issue that makes him an appealing candidate to one person or another and not his stance on our government's role in society but none the less by voting for him you get the entire package. You can not vote for part of a candidate.

Yes every vote last year was a vote for change. Neither candidate was George W. Bush. But the two were not the same, a vote for McCain was not like a vote for Obama. The changes they proposed were not the same.

Change was really such a hollow slogan. It said nothing that was not obvious and really did not establish, in any clear way, what the candidate was about other than to define it in the negative. (I am about something that is not the last guy) Great so how are you different? Telling me that your different really doesn't say much.

Mong, this is wrong. ;) In fact, I vote for general ideas of what I think a candidate will do, what they represent. That much is true for all of us. While voting for Reagan might have been voting for 'less government', how was it voting for Iran/Contra? Voting for Richard Nixon was voting for opening up China and 'law and order', but how was it voting for Watergate? A vote for Clinton would have been a vote for 'Monica'? Very tenuous.

as far as the word change? I am not about to argue the campaign, all I will say is that every Presidential Candidate has offered us some version of 'change' in their campaign. What word is used is not important. Let's just say that American's apparently wanted something very different that what they had been getting.

[lonny23]

Did he do something to the military, or is this about healthcare? Not certain I understand that point.



From everything I have heard, this will die in the Senate. My guess is that it does just that, and then stays dead through the mid term elections and then for the 2012 ones as well. We'll be sitting in 10-15 years no closer, for better or worse, to a better health care program than we were 10-15 yaers ago.
We'll be better with NO government health care program.

My point for the board is what do you do to help our government besides let them steal your money without putting up a fight? For those that can say they help/helped the government, did it really make things better?

Since when did people earn the right to have the government help them live longer? I know some might think that stance is cruel, but how about this? Is whatever the government will now do for us health-care wise equivalent to all the money they've stolen in the past and future through taxes? I say "No."

[lonny23]

1 minute 50? is that all it takes to be hated, now?
Some of the posters are off their rockers in their comments. I don't defend the current administration, but I have to say this:

Proper military protocol, just as speech protocol dictates that you give the proper shout-outs FIRST. I re-enlisted in October and the first thing I did was thank the Group Commander and Group Chief for being there and then my Commander for administering the oath. That comes before anything you say. If you go to a military function, you always acknowledge the DV's FIRST.

Obama came there to speak for a purpose. As much as possible, I don't like the idea of cancelling speeches just because something happened. I also don't think it would be right for him to speak to them and not at least say something about the events of the week. I'm not a fan, but he did the right thing in how he segwayed into the Ft. Hood incident.

[pied]

And yet you have called people idiots several times in different places on this board.
Casting stones when you are guilty of the same behavior is a hypocrite. Love ya Pied but please don't look down your nose at some that call names like you do not. You do.

Please don't misunderstand. I don't mind people calling me names, although I think my grand total of calling people on this board idiots, is two.

You go to the Marcus, well let's say Lewisville game and the farmer are yelling stupid crap, what do you think?

What if it is your kid, their friend, or an adult wearing Blue/Silver that starts chanting inappropriate things while representing you and your school. Are your reactions similar? Should they be? What is your reaction when you call them on it and they say that you don't complain about the farmers doing the same thing?

[lonny23]

You found it funny because it is easy to laugh at those with whom you disagree. Further, I am not shocked to hear that you don't care to try and understand a point of view that is divergent from your own. You like to paint yourself as an open minded independent thinker as I suppose we all do but in reality the language of the above post and your prior comments would indicate to me that you are anything but what you present yourself to be. I have enjoyed reading many of the articles which you have posted I have found them thought provoking even if I did not agree with them.

The article I posted was not a discourse on my own political thought but a well written thoughtful article about the ever increasing role of government in our lives and the loss of liberty as a result of that increase.

In short the more you ask of government the more you are required to give to the government in order for the government to meet your demands on it. The more you give to the government of your own means earned through your labor the less ability you have to affect your own will in your life or the less you free you are. Do you agree or disagree? This was the question that interested me in the article and this is the question which to me should be at the heart of the health care debate in our country.I forgot to add this earlier, but I'll say it now:

1. Obama got elected saying he was lowering taxes.
2. Obama got elected saying he was going to raise benefits.
3. Lonny raised the flag saying you can never lower taxes and raise benefits without going further into debt.
4. Lonny is a firm believer in less government, which means we could collect fewer taxes. I'll spend enough money as it is without the government circulating my money. Besides the value-added benefit he talked about where everybody is happy, the money game usually will play out domestically and internationally where one person gets more of a benefit than the other person. The U.S. can only be a rich country by seeing other countries poorer.

The fact of the matter is most of the people in this country were perfectly fine with a socialistic system where they take from somebody else and give to you. We're a Robin Hood country and many think they're owed the money from the rich and that's bogus. I hate how so many rich people cheated and lied their way into money, but it's still their money.

[JagFan]

Please don't misunderstand. I don't mind people calling me names, although I think my grand total of calling people on this board idiots, is two.

You go to the Marcus, well let's say Lewisville game and the farmer are yelling stupid crap, what do you think?

What if it is your kid, their friend, or an adult wearing Blue/Silver that starts chanting inappropriate things while representing you and your school. Are your reactions similar? Should they be? What is your reaction when you call them on it and they say that you don't complain about the farmers doing the same thing?

Pied I don't like name calling in any situation. And yes I have taken Marcus to task for some very low things they have done to FM. I have also gotten on to my teams (FM)fans for stooping to that level. I see your point, but you are calling out all republicans for name calling. All do not. Yes, I am going to speak out against healthcare or their lack of sensitivity towards the military or wanting to put a bigger tax burden on people. That is my right and I did not vote for them. I think I have called Reid and Pelosi idiots but I have not called Obama any names. If I did that is wrong. I also always refer to him as my President.

Calling anyone an idiot is not nice.

The name calling can be a bit much and that is alot of the reason I backed away from the yard (politics) for awhile. But it was not only done by the Republicans on this board, not by a long shot. I see were you are more sensitive to what Republicans say but do not group all of them into one.

[lonny23]

I understand your frustration. I can not help myself, however, I have to discuss it. I have to try and further my own understanding in part because I have to try and make sure that my thoughts are clear. I have to make sure I understand what is going on so that I might better affect the world in which I live, the world in which my children are going to live. The more I understand about this administration and in fact today's Democratic, and for that matter Republican Party, the more I fear the direction that this country is taking. I fear the path of the Democrats more than the path of the Republicans for the time being I suppose. The idea that it is some how the governments job to take care of us is truly frightening to me.

I agree with your assessment of the liberal left in America believing that they know what is best for all of us uneducated, unenlightened slobs. I will never forget the conversation I had with one of my fellow educators who told me that if I were just a little more educated I would think like him. The arrogance is absolutely astounding. It is remarkable how similar this view is to the view held by the aristocracy who believed that the common man must be taken care of because he could not take care of himself. The aristocrats believed that it was their job to take care of those who could not take care of themselves. The enlightenment turned all of that on its head and yet we find ourselves reverting right back to it.Mong, it's not just today. This country was founded to fail. Many of those who founded this country wanted to do so in hopes of creating a future utopian society of a one-world government. Our system of national sovereignity was set up in hopes of decaying it. There were several times in the past where they tried to take it away and failed. I'm not convinced they'll fail again.

People think Lincoln was a great hero. He was one of the worst about creating a larger government and taking away states rights.

FDR got us out of the depression (With the help of a war), but he's also the guy that laid the path for the current socialism.

Check out the article on income taxes and how they were up to 70% at one time. The first federal income tax was 1861, before the current 1913 job.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States

This whole Republican-Democrat argument comes back to do you vote for big government or even bigger government? Neither are the right answer.

Although I don't take the aristocratic stance of the dumb public, I do think we have a dumb public who has bought what the media and suits have told us!

[lonny23]

Communication is a two way street. And we certainly do have the right to oppose this stuff they are putting together.

So please don't try to say the libs have been open for ideas and it is only conservatives that are obstinate. We haven't had the locks changed on any doors.

I am not opposed to some healthcare reform but my ideas and thoughts when expressed by conservatives have been laughed at and told to go away. We are locked out.
Truth be told, most politicians claim labels to posture themselves for votes. It has very little to do with their true feelings. It's just like Jesse Helms saying he wouldn't oppose subsidies because he wouldn't get re-elected. That's the exact reason to not re-elect him.

[pied]

Pied I don't like name calling in any situation. And yes I have taken Marcus to task for some very low things they have done to FM. I have also gotten on to my teams (FM)fans for stooping to that level. I see your point, but you are calling out all republicans for name calling. All do not. Yes, I am going to speak out against healthcare or their lack of sensitivity towards the military or wanting to put a bigger tax burden on people. That is my right and I did not vote for them. I think I have called Reid and Pelosi idiots but I have not called Obama any names. If I did that is wrong. I also always refer to him as my President.

Calling anyone an idiot is not nice.

The name calling can be a bit much and that is alot of the reason I backed away from the yard (politics) for awhile. But it was not only done by the Republicans on this board, not by a long shot. I see were you are more sensitive to what Republicans say but do not group all of them into one.

Have NEVER said all.

One time called someone an idiot, in a joking manner, recalling when it was said earlier in a discussion.

The other was mojotrain, and I believe I said, "You're either an idiot or a liar". May have been a bit over the top, but so was his statement.

I try and attack the idea, and typically do not go further than calling an idea or thought dopey.

As far as conservative commentators the ones I know of and get the most press, I have little respet for. The one that I may have the most is Rod Dreher. Don't see much from him around here though.

[lonny23]

Is was an issue and it was shot down. Just because you don't think they were the best ideas that does not mean they were not tried.

I too am tired of everyone on capital hill having their own adjenda and putting us "little people" last. I am not for a public option, I am not for fining people who do not have insurance, I am not for paying for abortions, I am not for telling companies that their insurance they offer is not enough so here we will make you pay for this, I am not for paying for illegal aliens. (they do get care now, it is called the ER). This is my right. I do feel it will hurt America and it will not be self sufficient any more than social security is.

I am not saying the Republicans have done any better, just don't lock the doors on them and their ideas. What is wrong with starting with smaller changes and going from there. Why do we need to change the whole system? Let's keep what is good and see where changes are needed. LEt's be open and transparent(Obama and Pelosi's words) about the process. Why late night votes and locked door meetings. I don't trust anyone up there right now to have my interest at heart.They never have and never will as long as people vote "D" or "R". That's a FACT!

I'll use logic for a minute. If the USSR is the mortal enemy of the US, are we going to fight off Sudan first or put our energy into fighting the USSR? I'd fight the Soviet's.

My point is, if Republicans and Democrats REALLY hate each other and REALLY are polar opposites in ideology, then why do they make sure they silence any 3rd party chatter before fighting among themselves? My argument is they're much alike and comfortable with each other and what they REALLY fear is a 3rd party point of view that upsets their apple carts.

[lonny23]

+1

All of it, including posting in the yard. I agree on most of the other points you made in a previous post as well.

I only wanted to comment that we have needed some form of healthcare reform for over 20 years, and during that time nothing was proffered. When my Brother-in-law goes $20,000 in debt because he had a diabetic seizure and had no health insurance because a. he had lost his job and b. could not get coverage (he was a diabetic after all), and then as he struggles to pay that debt it is handed over to a collection company with 25% interest and his wages are garnered when he DOES get a job, something is wrong. There are many other issues. I am NOT saying this bill is the best, but if the folks on the conservative side cared at all about this issue perhaps they might have presented some reform before having their hand forced?

I have to reiterate: I am a "compassionate conservative" to borrow a previous President's phrase. But I am fed up. In fact with both sides. I wish we had a third party, I have voted that route 3 times in my life.
You're right it's a vicious cycle, but this health care game has a bunch of levels:
1. Our litigation and malpractice suits make the cost of healthcare too high.
2. Doctors want patients and pharmaceutical companies want money and that means neither side wants to heal people and instead wants repeat customers. It's all corrupt.
3. The supply and demand system we have is great, but most people are greedy at the expense of others. We'll never have good health care as long as everybody is trying to "Get their's."

[JagFan]

Have NEVER said all.

One time called someone an idiot, in a joking manner, recalling when it was said earlier in a discussion.

The other was mojotrain, and I believe I said, "You're either an idiot or a liar". May have been a bit over the top, but so was his statement.

I try and attack the idea, and typically do not go further than calling an idea or thought dopey.

As far as conservative commentators the ones I know of and get the most press, I have little respet for. The one that I may have the most is Rod Dreher. Don't see much from him around here though.

So you are giving commentators that much influence on your thoughts? That's why I laugh when people give Rush or Hannity so much credit. They have a show and speak their views, as does some liberals. They do not speak for the Republican party or for the Democrat party, they hold no office and are not elected. They are commentators. Successful ones but just commentators. You and others for different reasons give them far to much influence.

I am afraid that the people in this country are to easily lead and have quit thinking for themselves. Or make it to easy for someone Else to speak for them.

My step brothers girlfriend, Amy became a citizen last year. She is from South Korea. She was very excited that she could say her oath and be a citizen in time to register to vote. She asked who should she vote for. I told her to sit down and make a list of issues that were important to her. Health care, the economy,foreign policy, abortion, military, global warming, whatever was important to her, not me or my brother but to her. Then do research go on line or read books about each candidate. Make check marks by the candidate that agrees with your thoughts. Whoever has the most check marks gets your vote. I have no idea if she did that or how she voted but maybe we all need to make that list and go with our own believes. Not what some guy on the radio or TV says.

[pied]

So you are giving commentators that much influence on your thoughts? That's why I laugh when people give Rush or Hannity so much credit. They have a show and speak their views, as does some liberals. They do not speak for the Republican party or for the Democrat party, they hold no office and are not elected. They are commentators. Successful ones but just commentators. You and others for different reasons give them far to much influence.

I am afraid that the people in this country are to easily lead and have quit thinking for themselves. Or make it to easy for someone Else to speak for them.


Perhaps, and I am not going to accuse anyone on here specifically, but when I do listen to Rush/Hannity/Levin/etc. and read posts on this board, the words/arguements used are almost identical.

I would also suggest the many chain email that get posted on this forum to cheers and smilies galore. THen you have the 500+ post threads in support of Rush.

All the while, very few come out and say they listen to him/them or give him importance.

In addition, the party seems to have little backbone in regards to him, and I would simply point to the Michael Steele vs. Limbaugh episode earlier in the year. The head of the Republican party vs. a commentator no one should take seriously. Who won?

I hear what you're saying, but the words ring a bit hollow to me.

[lonny23]

Once again, I don't watch Bill Maher or John Stewart or Keith Olbermann. I've heard enough of them to dismiss them. In addition they don't support my side/point of view.

Heres an analogy that may or may not work.

If I go to a Texas/ou game and am heckled with weak smack talk from sooner fans I dismiss it as them being dumb. It may annoy me but it doesn't surprise me or affect me in any meaningful way. On the other hand, if I see a bunch of Texas fans acting inappropriately, cursing at kids/old women, cheering players as they are removed on a stretcher, etc. I will be embarrased.

If it continues to happen and the leaders and key supporters are vocal inthat way, it would wear on me and may drive me away eventually.

Lucky for me, we have Mack.Lucky for you that you have Mack because a fanbase as lousy as you have deserves an equally lousy coach when speaking of morals, ethics, and the way he handles and carries himself. Mack is the ultimate Texas coach because he's the epitome of the Texas fan.

[JagFan]

Perhaps, and I am not going to accuse anyone on here specifically, but when I do listen to Rush/Hannity/Levin/etc. and read posts on this board, the words/arguements used are almost identical.

I would also suggest the many chain email that get posted on this forum to cheers and smilies galore. THen you have the 500+ post threads in support of Rush.

All the while, very few come out and say they listen to him/them or give him importance.

In addition, the party seems to have little backbone in regards to him, and I would simply point to the Michael Steele vs. Limbaugh episode earlier in the year. The head of the Republican party vs. a commentator no one should take seriously. Who won?

I hear what you're saying, but the words ring a bit hollow to me.

Oh I am not saying that people don't listen to Rush and think he is the best thing since chocolate. I do and have listen to him. Not steadily but I do. I also go and look up things he said that interest me as I do when I hear things on CNN.

No, I do not like chain e-mails and that takes us back to my point that the people in this country are to easily lead. I meant that as a whole not just one party or the other.

I think we are actually agreeing on this point. :) I just put it across the board and you are putting it on the Republicans because you expect more from them?

[lonny23]

Good analogy, except that thoise fans have no bearing on your life.....you constantly running down conservatives and ignoring the liberals makes you appear liberal.....just like if you ignored the Sooners, but got after the Horns fans.....everybody would assume you are a Sooner.

IF, and I emphasize IF, you are a conservative, you do more harm by giving the liberals a pass...at least be fair....I criticize conservatives....I got all over McCain.....be a complete politico, not a half-azzer.
Pied has never said a word that made me think he was a conservative. Pretty much everything he's ever said or stood for was the exact opposite of me, but I'm not a 100% conservative according to general beliefs myself. I'm sure enough not a card-carrying Republican.

[pied]

Lucky for you that you have Mack because a fanbase as lousy as you have deserves an equally lousy coach when speaking of morals, ethics, and the way he handles and carries himself. Mack is the ultimate Texas coach because he's the epitome of the Texas fan.

Great point.

[lonny23]

Thanks.

Any more dreams lately?
No, the last one showed the direction the country is heading in.

[pied]

Pied has never said a word that made me think he was a conservative. Pretty much everything he's ever said or stood for was the exact opposite of me, but I'm not a 100% conservative according to general beliefs myself. I'm sure enough not a card-carrying Republican.

To be clear what have I said or staetd that I stand for is the exact oppostie of you?

I would presume you are not a Christian, pro-abortion, for same sx marriage, were against the invasion of Iraq, and did not like Goerge Bush.

Kind of odd.

[lonny23]

Honestly I really don't know what a lot of this means, but I'll give it a shot.

A non-driver is hurt in an auto accident, without their ID/healthcard, and the paramedics arrive at the scene. Do they treat or wait until they know the person is insured?


Or in this case are there no paramedics because they weren't discussed in the Constitution?
If they wanted to be a good samaritan, they'd treat whether they got money or not.

People should have the insurance proof with them.

I'm a believer that if you want health care, you pay for it if your employer doesn't give it to you. This gets back to my onion analogy that outside costs make health care more expensive. It's like a crumbling building, but nobody gets to the root and cuts out the lawsuits and the ties to drugs and wanting repeat customers.

[pied]

If they wanted to be a good samaritan, they'd treat whether they got money or not.

People should have the insurance proof with them.

I'm a believer that if you want health care, you pay for it if your employer doesn't give it to you. This gets back to my onion analogy that outside costs make health care more expensive. It's like a crumbling building, but nobody gets to the root and cuts out the lawsuits and the ties to drugs and wanting repeat customers.

So the answer is?

[lonny23]

Mong, this is wrong. ;) In fact, I vote for general ideas of what I think a candidate will do, what they represent. That much is true for all of us. While voting for Reagan might have been voting for 'less government', how was it voting for Iran/Contra? Voting for Richard Nixon was voting for opening up China and 'law and order', but how was it voting for Watergate? A vote for Clinton would have been a vote for 'Monica'? Very tenuous.

as far as the word change? I am not about to argue the campaign, all I will say is that every Presidential Candidate has offered us some version of 'change' in their campaign. What word is used is not important. Let's just say that American's apparently wanted something very different that what they had been getting.
He's trying to say that who we vote for means we're accepting their past behavior and future behavior, both expected and unexpected.

A vote for Clinton was a vote in 1992 for a guy who had always been accused of being a womanizer. It was also a vote for a guy who ran for trouble for 12 years as Arkysaw governor. He ran from trouble for 8 years in the White House, too.

Voting for Obama and anybody else means voting for the whole package. You might focus on 1 thing, but you're accepting all the stances.

I'm not old enough to know all of Nixon's past, but my guess is he showed behaviors in that past that made Watergate a plausible event.

[lonny23]

Have NEVER said all.

One time called someone an idiot, in a joking manner, recalling when it was said earlier in a discussion.

The other was mojotrain, and I believe I said, "You're either an idiot or a liar". May have been a bit over the top, but so was his statement.

I try and attack the idea, and typically do not go further than calling an idea or thought dopey.

As far as conservative commentators the ones I know of and get the most press, I have little respet for. The one that I may have the most is Rod Dreher. Don't see much from him around here though.
Most of the conservative commentators do so because it means more money for them. I mean, they rail on D's and act like R's are God, but they're almost the same party. It's hypocrisy and I still say if you hate what D's do, you should be almost as unhappy with R's and vice-versa.

[Firebird]

As far as conservative commentators the ones I know of and get the most press, I have little respet for. The one that I may have the most is Rod Dreher. Don't see much from him around here though.

Dreher is awesome. I disagree with him every now and then, but he is always thoughtful, open, and not a toolbag.

[lonny23]

So you are giving commentators that much influence on your thoughts? That's why I laugh when people give Rush or Hannity so much credit. They have a show and speak their views, as does some liberals. They do not speak for the Republican party or for the Democrat party, they hold no office and are not elected. They are commentators. Successful ones but just commentators. You and others for different reasons give them far to much influence.

I am afraid that the people in this country are to easily lead and have quit thinking for themselves. Or make it to easy for someone Else to speak for them.

My step brothers girlfriend, Amy became a citizen last year. She is from South Korea. She was very excited that she could say her oath and be a citizen in time to register to vote. She asked who should she vote for. I told her to sit down and make a list of issues that were important to her. Health care, the economy,foreign policy, abortion, military, global warming, whatever was important to her, not me or my brother but to her. Then do research go on line or read books about each candidate. Make check marks by the candidate that agrees with your thoughts. Whoever has the most check marks gets your vote. I have no idea if she did that or how she voted but maybe we all need to make that list and go with our own believes. Not what some guy on the radio or TV says.You're right, but people are lazy. They let the radio, TV, and entertainers speak for them and repeat the company line. It's sickening to me to defend people who have the right to vote and then they don't even take it serious enough to vote for what they believe in. It's just like Leno asking a bunch of black people questions on things that Bush/McCain stood for and Obama didn't, but they'd be Obama people.

I get tired of the masses spewing liberal agendas and lies just as I get tired of seeing the conservative garbage. I think it's so stupid that most of my relatives/parents friends hate Obama and Democrats so much, but they act like Republicans are so great.

[pied]

Dreher is awesome. I disagree with him every now and then, but he is always thoughtful, open, and not a toolbag.

Came across him on an NPR show....

[lonny23]

Perhaps, and I am not going to accuse anyone on here specifically, but when I do listen to Rush/Hannity/Levin/etc. and read posts on this board, the words/arguements used are almost identical.

I would also suggest the many chain email that get posted on this forum to cheers and smilies galore. THen you have the 500+ post threads in support of Rush.

All the while, very few come out and say they listen to him/them or give him importance.

In addition, the party seems to have little backbone in regards to him, and I would simply point to the Michael Steele vs. Limbaugh episode earlier in the year. The head of the Republican party vs. a commentator no one should take seriously. Who won?

I hear what you're saying, but the words ring a bit hollow to me.You're 100% right about what people say. The link game was mentioned earlier in this thread and I'm firmly on the side of individual thinking. That's why most everything I type on here is what I think and have independently come to the conclusion on and not what somebody else wants me to believe or think.

The problem is so many people have been programmed to focus on parties that they've ignored what the support truly means. It gets back to the argument in the bible in Luke 6:42

42Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.

I mean why rail on Obama for being a socialist, but still support all kinds of government programs? People seriously say that and cry about him trying to kill old people. I've gotten both sets of emails.

At some point, people either need to agree to socialism or go the other way and have none of it. I already know too many people want socialism and most of the people who claim to be a Republican or conservative are also for socialism. Socialism is socialism whether it's a little or a lot. They start with a little to condition you to a lot later on.

[lonny23]

Great point.
I thought so!:D

See, we can agree even if for different reasons!:p

[lonny23]

To be clear what have I said or staetd that I stand for is the exact oppostie of you?

I would presume you are not a Christian, pro-abortion, for same sx marriage, were against the invasion of Iraq, and did not like Goerge Bush.

Kind of odd.
1. not a Christian- My documented comments on this board are probably the most conservative Biblical principles on here. I have issues with stated Christians as being too liberal.

2. pro-abortion- Under no circumstances

3. same sx marriage- God outlawed it, so I'm against government acknowledgement of it. They have the right to choose their lives, but I'm against government support of anything that violates the Bible

4. were against the invasion of Iraq- No, I still support it and this is where I disagree with guys like Ron Paul (Who I like a lot) and the Constitution Party. I'm all for following the Constitution and such, but it's somewhat semantics for me to call it an unjust war because we didn't specifically declare war. When Congress votes to spend money on a war, that means they support a war. I've been in DoD for a while and know the government can't tellall their secrets. Sometimes we need the trust of the people to go to war "Just because." We didn't say anything about yellowcake in the Middle East until it was all moved out of there and that's for national security. I still say bad guys wanted to do things to America and I support killiing them. I also support hurting the cause of those who hate Israel. We all know Saddam killed his own people and he needed to go.

5. did not like Goerge Bush- I like the guy in many ways and respect how he respected the office (On time unlike Clinton, wore suits, wouldn't bash his enemies in the press or politics or fight back with Obama), but I disagreed with how he made government bigger. I like him better than Clinton and Obama, but the only President in my lifetime that I've liked very much was Reagan. I'm not a Nixon guy and don't know enough about Ford, but disagree with him pardoning Nixon.

6. I'm sorry, but you've always sounded like a liberal to me.

[lonny23]

So the answer is?
Alexander Graham Bell!:p

[pied]

1. not a Christian- My documented comments on this board are probably the most conservative Biblical principles on here. I have issues with stated Christians as being too liberal.

2. pro-abortion- Under no circumstances

3. same sx marriage- God outlawed it, so I'm against government acknowledgement of it. They have the right to choose their lives, but I'm against government support of anything that violates the Bible

4. were against the invasion of Iraq- No, I still support it and this is where I disagree with guys like Ron Paul (Who I like a lot) and the Constitution Party. I'm all for following the Constitution and such, but it's somewhat semantics for me to call it an unjust war because we didn't specifically declare war. When Congress votes to spend money on a war, that means they support a war. I've been in DoD for a while and know the government can't tellall their secrets. Sometimes we need the trust of the people to go to war "Just because." We didn't say anything about yellowcake in the Middle East until it was all moved out of there and that's for national security. I still say bad guys wanted to do things to America and I support killiing them. I also support hurting the cause of those who hate Israel. We all know Saddam killed his own people and he needed to go.

5. did not like Goerge Bush- I like the guy in many ways and respect how he respected the office (On time unlike Clinton, wore suits, wouldn't bash his enemies in the press or politics or fight back with Obama), but I disagreed with how he made government bigger. I like him better than Clinton and Obama, but the only President in my lifetime that I've liked very much was Reagan. I'm not a Nixon guy and don't know enough about Ford, but disagree with him pardoning Nixon.

6. I'm sorry, but you've always sounded like a liberal to me.


Don't be sorry, you've always sounded like a nut bag to me.

It does appear we do have some common ground though. Go figure.

[cougmantx]

Mung while I applaud your efforts to bring discussion to the board I have to agree with those that comment on where you get your information from.

I believe that the idea of health care reform is a noble and worthy cause but we will not see anything from either side of the isle that is anything more than a boom for the insurance industry. Mark my words, the end result will be full of loop holes for the health insurance carriers while it becomes mandates for the general public. I was hopeful but with out a viable public option this bill will not benefit the public and just imposes more mandates and taxes to those that can least afford them...generally, the diminishing middle class.

Edward Bernays, the father of public relations was quoted as saying, "If you manufacture an authoritative figure, who repeats the same messages over and over, this will appeal to their conscience desires. The unwashed masses will helplessly follow that leader and go along with any message they spout."

Both parties follow this principle. Getting to the truth in any matter of consequence has become virtually impossible because the reality is, the game is stacked, the jig is in and the "unwashed masses" either don't have the time or energy it would take to peel the skin of the onion back enough to find out where the rotten parts are.

I am beginning to believe that no federal funds, tax dollars, grants, tax credits or support should be given to any industry, corporation, church or charitable organization until and if they can prove they are serving the public good. PERIOD, end of story.

For those that want to use the argument in the article to show why free markets are better than public option...let me agree with you on one condition.

Stop all grants, federal tax breaks, government funded, subsides to the agricultural industry, medical or drug companies, all industrial or manufacturing facilities. Separate the commercial banks from the investment banks, require corporations, churches and charitable organizations to prove they are serving the public good as the original laws for this organizations required and do away with all patents and then let the chips fall where they will.

Now, that is really free enterprise...anything short of that is just partisan wrangling and BS to keep the "unwashed masses" subservient to an elitist few.

The end result either way is that the majority of us would be out of work, out of home and out of hope in a very short time.

[pied]

Lucky for you that you have Mack because a fanbase as lousy as you have deserves an equally lousy coach when speaking of morals, ethics, and the way he handles and carries himself. Mack is the ultimate Texas coach because he's the epitome of the Texas fan.

Thought you might like this story on Veterans' Day:

So, as many of you know, Antwan Cobb is a good friend of mine. He's like a little brother to me. Well he and I have another good friend, Sean Hearn, who is like a big brother to me. Right now Sean is currentloy in Austin until the 18th, on his R&R. He serves as part of the 130th CST, and has been in Iraq for the last 6 months, fighting for our country. Sean is from Pflugerville, but as lived in a few places growing up. But no matter where he's been, he's always been a Longhorn. On Memorial Day 2007, Sean's fiancee at the time had a broither fighting in the war. Kile G. West was killed in action. This moved Sean Hearn to do something about it, and join the US Army. Sean went to Basic Training, left as the Honor Grad, and is now a Combat Engineer, basically a bodyguard for Lt.Cl's over seas.

....

Mack Brown, who had zero idea that this tour was even going on just 5 minutes ago, walked into his office and acted as if we had had an appoinment with him which was set months ago. This man is 100% real and genuine. He came in shook everyon'es hand, and looked us in the eye. He called us by name for the entire half hour or so that we were in there. We all kept feeling like this man's time was so important that we needed to hurry up and leave, but Mack simply would not let us. I can't tell you how many times Mack said, "Wait, before you guys leave, I want to show you this." He acted as if we were long lost pals, reuniting for the first time in ages.

At one point, after saying that, he walked over near his desk and opened a door. Antwan's eyes got wide, and he said, "Wow, I've never even been in this room." Mack took us into the coaches room, where they all get together and gameplan, and make the big decisions. Sean walked over to take a picture in a seat, and Mack told Sean where he sat. Sean immediately got up and walked over to Mack's chair. Watching him soak up that moment was awesome. After my buddy and I also sat in the chair, and after some more conversation, we were ready to leave, already on cloud nine. That's when Mack looked at Sean and said, "Sean, take a picture in my chair at my desk." "Coach, are you sure?" "Have a seat Sean." You should have heard when Kirkendoll and Tray found out that we got to sit in that chair. It was epic.

All in all, yesterday was without a doubt one of the best days of my life, and of Sean's life as well. We were on cloud 11 for the rest of the night. You always see Mack on TV, and maybe some of you have even scored a few seconds of solo time with him. But spending a good half hour with this man in his office, having him treat us like royalty, like family, was just unbelievable. Mack Brown is an amazing man, and an even better human being, and yesterday is a day that none of us involved, not even Antwan, will ever forget. Hook Em Mack. You are my hero, along with my big bro Sean.

http://www.shaggybevo.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51357

[Firebird]

I am not sure about the current incarnation, but this is why I am in favor of healthcare reform in general:

Amount of money I have paid my current "healthcare provider" in the 17 months I have used them: $12,000.00 (more or less).

Number of times I or my wife have visited one of my healthcare provider's "authorized doctors" in those 17 months: 3 (not counting a physical which was paid for by an employer up front). No hospital stays, nothing required any time beyond a prescription for antibiotics.

Number of times they have managed to return a phone call for an appointment within a business day, including the one I tried to get yesterday: 0

Please continue to tell me about the best health care in the world I am getting as a result of this "free market."

[E-Vol-ution]

The main reason I endorsed healthcare reform.........Both my group of companies and our 35 employees will be able to afford a semblance of health insurance. Maybe not the best......but they will no longer be a total burden on me as an individual taxpayer. These people will also be available to get treatment in certain scenarios where an entire day of waiting at Parkland to be seen would have cut their hours at work.

[pied]

Here is my experience(most recent), and to be honest a bit embarrasing. My wife was diagnosed with the flu last Monday. I started feeling bad Tue/Wed/Thur (sore throat/achy/etc) and we had a school field trip planned for the weekned leaving early Friday AM through Sunday.

Skipped my soccer game Thursday night because I was feeling bad and she convinced me to go to the RapidMed place she went to eariler in the week. Normally I just tought those things out, but was headed out of town and since she was diagnosed I went ahead and scheduled it, which was kind of cool. WAs at an open house at my kids school(another reason I skipped the game).

I scheduled it from my phone on the web. Got a call about an hour later saying the Dr. would be available in 15 minutes. Went in, filled out some paperwork and was in an office in less than 10 minutes.

They took the swab and blood and did the tests in the office. Both came back negative, but I had a slight fever and because of my wife's diagnosis, they went ahead and prescribed me some drugs.

He said I could have Ralenza(sp?) or tamiflu, but the first was cheaper and better. Also two different cough medicines, he said I could fill or not(my wife alerady had some).

Cost me $20 for a clean diagnosis, and some prescrptions. The Ralenza was $14, one cough medicine was $6 and the other $29.
Not sure it was worht it, or if I got good care. Could have saved some time and jsut got me the meds, which I think were pretty useless anyway.

[cougmantx]

Here is my experience(most recent), and to be honest a bit embarrasing. My wife was diagnosed with the flu last Monday. I started feeling bad Tue/Wed/Thur (sore throat/achy/etc) and we had a school field trip planned for the weekned leaving early Friday AM through Sunday.

Skipped my soccer game Thursday night because I was feeling bad and she convinced me to go to the RapidMed place she went to eariler in the week. Normally I just tought those things out, but was headed out of town and since she was diagnosed I went ahead and scheduled it, which was kind of cool. WAs at an open house at my kids school(another reason I skipped the game).

I scheduled it from my phone on the web. Got a call about an hour later saying the Dr. would be available in 15 minutes. Went in, filled out some paperwork and was in an office in less than 10 minutes.

They took the swab and blood and did the tests in the office. Both came back negative, but I had a slight fever and because of my wife's diagnosis, they went ahead and prescribed me some drugs.

He said I could have Ralenza(sp?) or tamiflu, but the first was cheaper and better. Also two different cough medicines, he said I could fill or not(my wife alerady had some).

Cost me $20 for a clean diagnosis, and some prescrptions. The Ralenza was $14, one cough medicine was $6 and the other $29.
Not sure it was worht it, or if I got good care. Could have saved some time and jsut got me the meds, which I think were pretty useless anyway.

Pied, let me give you a different scenario. I am a small business owner. My wife worked for me for two years, I had one daughter in college, one in high school. My health care cost ran $1799.00 a month for twelve months and then shot up over $2000 for 12 months. During this time I believe my daughters and wife may have gone for their routine well women check ups and one daughter got strep throat. So realistically I paid $45,558.00 for health care for two years. How much do you think it would have cost me to just pay for the doctors visits...let's just say $5000.00 at the most and I think that would be high. We had to have it though, what if something had really gone bad.

My wife went back to work for another company mostly for the health care benefits. With her being in a lager group they can get some discounts that I couldn't as a much smaller business. My question to you is, does this sound like a level playing ground to you? What does this say about our individual abilities to develope and maintain a buisness. Remember, many don't start buisness with a lot of capital and need everything they have to just to get it off the ground. They really do fly by the seat of their pants.

In this country we always talk about how the small business, the ma and pop operation are the back bone of our economic engine but the reality is they are penalized in many, many ways. They don't have the capitol to move offshore, hire foreign workers, negotiate favorable contracts or such. Many have to fold or lay off staff for the reasons above. Some may say, so be it, it is free market at work. My question is, is it really?

How many of the larger corporations are allowed to offshore, get tax breaks, are subsidized or receive federal money for development and then sell their products of their federally subsidized developments for huge profits?

It is not a fair playing field no matter how you cut it. We talk one thing and walk another.

By the way, the prices that I quoted for health care were with a $2000.00 deductible and that was before I had my heart attack. Hmmmm, wonder what it would cost me now if I could get it?

[pied]

For the record, I pay less than $4500/year in premiums(haelth/dental/vision). I paid about 50% more last year. I have no complaints really in this department.

[Firebird]

Pied, let me give you a different scenario. I am a small business owner. My wife worked for me for two years, I had one daughter in college, one in high school. My health care cost ran $1799.00 a month for twelve months and then shot up over $2000 for 12 months. During this time I believe my daughters and wife may have gone for their routine well women check ups and one daughter got strep throat. So realistically I paid $45,558.00 for health care for two years. How much do you think it would have cost me to just pay for the doctors visits...let's just say $5000.00 at the most and I think that would be high. We had to have it though, what if something had really gone bad.

My wife went back to work for another company mostly for the health care benefits. With her being in a lager group they can get some discounts that I couldn't as a much smaller business. My question to you is, does this sound like a level playing ground to you? What does this say about our individual abilities to develope and maintain a buisness. Remember, many don't start buisness with a lot of capital and need everything they have to just to get it off the ground. They really do fly by the seat of their pants.

In this country we always talk about how the small business, the ma and pop operation are the back bone of our economic engine but the reality is they are penalized in many, many ways. They don't have the capitol to move offshore, hire foreign workers, negotiate favorable contracts or such. Many have to fold or lay off staff for the reasons above. Some may say, so be it, it is free market at work. My question is, is it really?

How many of the larger corporations are allowed to offshore, get tax breaks, are subsidized or receive federal money for development and then sell their products of their federally subsidized developments for huge profits?

It is not a fair playing field no matter how you cut it. We talk one thing and walk another.

By the way, the prices that I quoted for health care were with a $2000.00 deductible and that was before I had my heart attack. Hmmmm, wonder what it would cost me now if I could get it?


I am not looking forward to premiums if/when I have kids. Like I said, I have paid $12,000.00 in premiums for 17 months of "healthcare."

[Firebird]

For the record, I pay less than $4500/year in premiums(haelth/dental/vision). I paid about 50% more last year. I have no complaints really in this department.

Pied-- are you counting your employer contribution? Because that is in essence your money. It is just moved around on the pay stub to make you feel like it, but it is part of your compensation that could be given to you in cash otherwise.

[pied]

Pied-- are you counting your employer contribution? Because that is in essence your money. It is just moved around on the pay stub to make you feel like it, but it is part of your compensation that could be given to you in cash otherwise.

I understand that and no I am not. Not accesible at the moment, but as I am re-enrolling soon, I'll add that amount.

[Dawg Fan]

I am not sure about the current incarnation, but this is why I am in favor of healthcare reform in general:

Amount of money I have paid my current "healthcare provider" in the 17 months I have used them: $12,000.00 (more or less).

Number of times I or my wife have visited one of my healthcare provider's "authorized doctors" in those 17 months: 3 (not counting a physical which was paid for by an employer up front). No hospital stays, nothing required any time beyond a prescription for antibiotics.

Number of times they have managed to return a phone call for an appointment within a business day, including the one I tried to get yesterday: 0

Please continue to tell me about the best health care in the world I am getting as a result of this "free market."

I have had none of those problems. My wife and I both have health insurance and it costs us $250 a month. My wife's company pays 100% of her premiums but I am afraid if they pass this new health bill that will all change for the worse. That is why I am perfectly happy with the system we have now. I get in to see my doctor just about any time I need to or if I do have to wait, it is only a day or so for regular visits.

[GoOwls]

Good point, if people like Rush Limbaugh/Michael savage/Sean Hannity have anything to do with my life any more that ou fans.

If you could point to where I have run down McCain/etc(with the possible exception of DeMint) I would like to see it. Likely the closest you are going to find is me comparing their policies to other candidates/officials.

You run down conservatives and almost never haggle about the tactics of liberals....you give them a pass.....I've never see someone who proposes to be a conservative look so much like a liberal.

[GoOwls]

Please don't misunderstand. I don't mind people calling me names, although I think my grand total of calling people on this board idiots, is two.
You go to the Marcus, well let's say Lewisville game and the farmer are yelling stupid crap, what do you think?

What if it is your kid, their friend, or an adult wearing Blue/Silver that starts chanting inappropriate things while representing you and your school. Are your reactions similar? Should they be? What is your reaction when you call them on it and they say that you don't complain about the farmers doing the same thing?

Was I one of them...I don't remember?

[cougmantx]

I am not looking forward to premiums if/when I have kids. Like I said, I have paid $12,000.00 in premiums for 17 months of "healthcare."

I hear you Firebird! Age change more than just the size of your ears. :D

You and I had a real interesting discussion on the free markets earlier in the year and I have kept some of what you had to say in mind. I like reasoned arguments but so much of what we hear today is directed at our fear based mentality.

Experience has a way of driving home facts in no uncertain terms but I will say that some of the best arguments on this board are put up by the younger members.

The reality is that those concerned about a government run option and those concerned about a free market option are equally right. When it come to the common man (or women) both the government and free market live and die on the blood of the innocent.

[GoOwls]

Perhaps, and I am not going to accuse anyone on here specifically, but when I do listen to Rush/Hannity/Levin/etc. and read posts on this board, the words/arguements used are almost identical.

I would also suggest the many chain email that get posted on this forum to cheers and smilies galore. THen you have the 500+ post threads in support of Rush.

All the while, very few come out and say they listen to him/them or give him importance.

In addition, the party seems to have little backbone in regards to him, and I would simply point to the Michael Steele vs. Limbaugh episode earlier in the year. The head of the Republican party vs. a commentator no one should take seriously. Who won?

I hear what you're saying, but the words ring a bit hollow to me.

See, you're sounding liike a liberal again....say something bad about Mahre and I'll feel better about it....:rolleyes:

[GoOwls]

Lucky for you that you have Mack because a fanbase as lousy as you have deserves an equally lousy coach when speaking of morals, ethics, and the way he handles and carries himself. Mack is the ultimate Texas coach because he's the epitome of the Texas fan.

I couldn't agree more.....handsome, successful, winner, charming, classy, the ladies love us....we are in agreement.....;)

[pied]

Was I one of them...I don't remember?

nope

[JagFan]

I am not looking forward to premiums if/when I have kids. Like I said, I have paid $12,000.00 in premiums for 17 months of "healthcare."


For the two of you? Are you self pay? My business pays my husband and mine and then we pay for the kids as with our employees. But for the four of us it is 800.00 a month with a 2500.00 deductibale.

[GoOwls]

I am not sure about the current incarnation, but this is why I am in favor of healthcare reform in general:

Amount of money I have paid my current "healthcare provider" in the 17 months I have used them: $12,000.00 (more or less).

Number of times I or my wife have visited one of my healthcare provider's "authorized doctors" in those 17 months: 3 (not counting a physical which was paid for by an employer up front). No hospital stays, nothing required any time beyond a prescription for antibiotics.

Number of times they have managed to return a phone call for an appointment within a business day, including the one I tried to get yesterday: 0

Please continue to tell me about the best health care in the world I am getting as a result of this "free market."

It's only good if you need to use it....now, if you don't want it, you will have to buy it, and if you can afford it and don't buy it, you will be fined and possibly sent to jail.....nice choice in wanting a system that forces you to buy something you don't really want or need right now.

[pied]

See, you're sounding liike a liberal again....say something bad about Mahre and I'll feel better about it....:rolleyes:

I don't even know what channel Maher is on. Why would I go seek someone out to disagree with? HBO? Comedy?

[GoOwls]

Pied-- are you counting your employer contribution? Because that is in essence your money. It is just moved around on the pay stub to make you feel like it, but it is part of your compensation that could be given to you in cash otherwise.

No...your company would never pay you that money.....they would keep it.....it's a benefit, not a wage.

[JagFan]

No...your company would never pay you that money.....they would keep it.....it's a benefit, not a wage.

I would love to give that to my employees and have them be responsible for their own health insurance like their car and home insurance. And yes I expect them to consider the premiums we pay when they think of their salary. It is a benefit but it is a costly one.

[Firebird]

I would love to give that to my employees and have them be responsible for their own health insurance like their car and home insurance. And yes I expect them to consider the premiums we pay when they think of their salary. It is a benefit but it is a costly one.

What JagFan said. The employer, when making a hire or keeping someone around, looks at what it costs to employ him and takes into account the cost of benefits. If salary plus benefits= 65000/year, then as an employee, that is what you are "worth" to the employer. The benefits absolutely should be considered a part of your salary.

[JagFan]

The kids pediatrician- Always same day appointments when sick. Two week out for well child checks. Calls to her nurse are returned within 2 hours.
My doctor- Well woman check- 1 week out. If I am sick seen the same day
Husband doctor- Same day if sick one week for physicals
Scheduling a yearly mammogram- 2 weeks out.

When my husband had an appendicitis I had him at Baylor Grapevine ER at 7:30 in the morning. After blood work and ultrasounds he was in surgery at 9:30 out at 10:30 and released 48 hours later.

When I was in labor with my first child there were complications. He was in distress. I had the Ob, the pediatrician (who left a waiting room full of people to be seen by another doctor), a NICU doctor and nurse all there within 15 minutes.

When my Father-in-law passed away at home with hospice the family GP came out on Christmas Eve to pronounce him dead. (my mother-in-law did not like the JP so he said before hand he would do it) he stayed for 4 hours because he was worried about my grandfather-in-law.

If you can guarantee me that kind of treatment and caring with this thing then I will consider it. And if they will put their families on the plan then I will consider it as well. If they are not willing to put themselves on this plan why should I have to be?

[Firebird]

For the two of you? Are you self pay? My business pays my husband and mine and then we pay for the kids as with our employees. But for the four of us it is 800.00 a month with a 2500.00 deductibale.

Nope, like I said, I am counting employer contribution. Employee/spouse at roughly 800/month. So actually I lowballed it. I think last year it was 750.

800/month X 17 (months I have been enrolled)= 13,600. But my premium went up, so a bit less.

Like I said, my "provider" has provided me three or four regular Dr.'s visits and in return collected from me $13,000 or thereabouts. But I have the best Dr.'s visit in the world!

[JagFan]

Nope, like I said, I am counting employer contribution. Employee/spouse at roughly 800/month. So actually I lowballed it. I think last year it was 750.

800/month X 17 (months I have been enrolled)= 13,600. But my premium went up, so a bit less.

Like I said, my "provider" has provided me three or four regular Dr.'s visits and in return collected from me $13,000 or thereabouts. But I have the best Dr.'s visit in the world!

They gotta pay for their insurance as well. And do you really think it will go down with a public program? Or will they dictate what the doctors can charge?

Still 750.00 a month for the two of you is high. My point with my experience's with my doctors was I don't have to wait, I see who I want and yes it does cost money, I don't see where that will change.

[Firebird]

They gotta pay for their insurance as well. And do you really think it will go down with a public program? Or will they dictate what the doctors can charge?

Still 750.00 a month for the two of you is high. My point with my experience's with my doctors was I don't have to wait, I see who I want and yes it does cost money, I don't see where that will change.

I don't either with the current reform. But what I don't get is the intransigence in saying that what we are doing is the awesomest and bestest ever.

Forgive me if I don't shed a tear for the organization that collected close to $13,000 from me in less than two years in exchange for a couple of antibiotic scrips. I have never understood why I am supposed to put them on a pedastal. At that rate, they better send some money my way if they screw up.

[Firebird]

JagFan, I am glad that as a business owner that you can attest that your employee's salary does include benefits and that you would pay them more cash if you could and let them handle insurance on their own.

[JagFan]

I don't either with the current reform. But what I don't get is the intransigence in saying that what we are doing is the awesomest and bestest ever.

Forgive me if I don't shed a tear for the organization that collected close to $13,000 from me in less than two years in exchange for a couple of antibiotic scrips. I have never understood why I am supposed to put them on a pedastal. At that rate, they better send some money my way if they screw up.

Not saying it is the best. I have walked out of doctor's offices because either what they charge or what they have said. I am not one that thinks all doctors are Gods.

I have stated many times there are things that need to be done to help with the growing premiums and costs. I just don't think a public option is one of them or the answer.

Yes, I am happy with my families doctors at this moment. I also went through several before I found who I was comfortable with.

[JagFan]

JagFan, I am glad that as a business owner that you can attest that your employee's salary does include benefits and that you would pay them more cash if you could and let them handle insurance on their own.

Are you being sarcastic?

[Firebird]

Not saying it is the best. I have walked out of doctor's offices because either what they charge or what they have said. I am not one that thinks all doctors are Gods.

I have stated many times there are things that need to be done to help with the growing premiums and costs. I just don't think a public option is one of them or the answer.

Yes, I am happy with my families doctors at this moment. I also went through several before I found who I was comfortable with.

My problem right now is that the plan I chose pretty much locks me into the "providers" I can use. I can change doctors within the system, but I still have to fight the system buearacracy to get to see any of them. That's my main complaint.

"My" contribution is only 250/month, but I actually read the whole benefits book I get and see the total cost. So I know how much in actuality it costs my employer to keep me around, and like I said-- that's what he thinks I am "worth". So I do indeed look at it as part of my contribution.

I agree with a lot of what coug says about the way the whole thing is set up being absolutely crushing to two types:

1. The middle class that tries to pay bills
2. A small business owner trying to compete with the giants

There's got to be something that can be done. I am also wary of public health care. But I don't want to say that everything is fine either. And I am not duped by the tort reform mantra, because that is just a red herring thrown out there.

[Firebird]

Are you being sarcastic?

No, dead serious. Will invoke Fresh Prince when I am being sarcastic. Srsly...:)

[JagFan]

No, dead serious. Will invoke Fresh Prince when I am being sarcastic. Srsly...:)

Ok. Just asking? When we hire a new employee we have to take into account their position and what the market salary is for that. Then benefits, we pay full premiums for health insurance for the employee, they can add family members at their expense (payroll deduction) then quit frankly how much does it cost to have said employee work everyday. Computers and all those fun engineering programs as well as tools.

No I don't count anything but the insurance premiums as their wage but there is a lot more into having an employee than writing a check. I also wish they would have to pay all of their own taxes and I just pay them money and they do all the payables themselves.

And my favorite checks to write are bonus checks at the end of a project. That means we all did our job and was on time. I know that when we start a project they will sometimes have to stay late and work some weekends. They are salaried so no overtime. It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to get to give them something extra for their time and effort.

[Firebird]

Ok. Just asking? When we hire a new employee we have to take into account their position and what the market salary is for that. Then benefits, we pay full premiums for health insurance for the employee, they can add family members at their expense (payroll deduction) then quit frankly how much does it cost to have said employee work everyday. Computers and all those fun engineering programs as well as tools.

No I don't count anything but the insurance premiums as their wage but there is a lot more into having an employee than writing a check. I also wish they would have to pay all of their own taxes and I just pay them money and they do all the payables themselves.

And my favorite checks to write are bonus checks at the end of a project. That means we all did our job and was on time. I know that when we start a project they will sometimes have to stay late and work some weekends. They are salaried so no overtime. It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to get to give them something extra for their time and effort.

Oh yeah, I am not saying that my desk is part of my salary. That's overhead and it's the tools to do a job. It'd be like telling a carpenter that the hammer was part of his wage.

But insurance premiums are def. part of your wage. I agree with you about taxes. Give me that money and let me earn interest on it until I have to pay in April. But that ain't how it works. I like it when I have to write a check to the IRS, it means I had use of my money for the year.

[JagFan]

My problem right now is that the plan I chose pretty much locks me into the "providers" I can use. I can change doctors within the system, but I still have to fight the system buearacracy to get to see any of them. That's my main complaint.

"My" contribution is only 250/month, but I actually read the whole benefits book I get and see the total cost. So I know how much in actuality it costs my employer to keep me around, and like I said-- that's what he thinks I am "worth". So I do indeed look at it as part of my contribution.

I agree with a lot of what coug says about the way the whole thing is set up being absolutely crushing to two types:

1. The middle class that tries to pay bills
2. A small business owner trying to compete with the giants

There's got to be something that can be done. I am also wary of public health care. But I don't want to say that everything is fine either. And I am not duped by the tort reform mantra, because that is just a red herring thrown out there.

My biggest time consuming thing every October. I review our policies and call around to get different quotes. I have gotten them to lower or at least stay the same on premiums to keep us. But on the other side there is no longer a big difference between companies premiums because they know what each is charging in Texas and adjust to that. As you can imagine I basically talk to them until they agree.

The tort reform could be a red heriing but some of the law suits are just stupid and that in turn raises their premiums. Maybe judges that will say that and get it tossed at the start. Or maybe the AMA could actuallypunishi doctors that screw up. I don't have all the answers and really wish Washington would not try to change everything with one bill. It can be done right and should not be rushed.

[GoOwls]

What JagFan said. The employer, when making a hire or keeping someone around, looks at what it costs to employ him and takes into account the cost of benefits. If salary plus benefits= 65000/year, then as an employee, that is what you are "worth" to the employer. The benefits absolutely should be considered a part of your salary.

It is part of your salary, in effect, but that's not my point. Most jobs have a wage established that is competitive in that area. If suddenly an employer did not have to shell out that layout for insurance, it is unlikely that they would disrupt the pay scale and increase wages....that's just business....if you save money by changing telephone companies, you don't give it to the employees, you reinvest it in the business.....same with saving insurance premiums.....it would be reinvested into business capital....or at least it should be.

[GoOwls]

JagFan, I am glad that as a business owner that you can attest that your employee's salary does include benefits and that you would pay them more cash if you could and let them handle insurance on their own.

Jagfan is the rare business owner....as I can attest from years of observation and conversation, it would be reinvested in most companies....and not the employees....the employees are seen as replacable, the business is not.

[JagFan]

Jagfan is the rare business owner....as I can attest from years of observation and conversation, it would be reinvested in most companies....and not the employees....the employees are seen as replacable, the business is not.

Not really. Most business owners view benefits as part of the wage. It is usually the employee that does not view them as wages. I had a conversation with a young person who worked for us. He wanted a raise. I told him it just was not in the budget at that time. He said but I only make so much a week. I pointed out to him that no he actually made this much a week but I have to take out x amount in taxes and he also recieved insurance and a truck to drive (this was when we did construction) that included gas and insurance. So while he only brought home x amount a week he did not have to pay for all of this out of that amount. He didn't get it.

While yes employees can be replaced the business could not run without someone doing the job so I also need my employees. Do a good job and I have no problems doing the same to them.

[dragonsdaddy]

Did he do something to the military, or is this about healthcare? Not certain I understand that point.



From everything I have heard, this will die in the Senate. My guess is that it does just that, and then stays dead through the mid term elections and then for the 2012 ones as well. We'll be sitting in 10-15 years no closer, for better or worse, to a different health care program than we were 10-15 yaers ago.
fify
we can only hope the senate is so sage.

[E-Vol-ution]

Exactly....benefits are part of an employee's total wages as is PTO, vacation and sick pay, vehicle usage outside of direct labor...most don't get it.
I always provide a detailed summary to our employees.

Not really. Most business owners view benefits as part of the wage. It is usually the employee that does not view them as wages. I had a conversation with a young person who worked for us. He wanted a raise. I told him it just was not in the budget at that time. He said but I only make so much a week. I pointed out to him that no he actually made this much a week but I have to take out x amount in taxes and he also recieved insurance and a truck to drive (this was when we did construction) that included gas and insurance. So while he only brought home x amount a week he did not have to pay for all of this out of that amount. He didn't get it.

While yes employees can be replaced the business could not run without someone doing the job so I also need my employees. Do a good job and I have no problems doing the same to them.

[GoOwls]

Not really. Most business owners view benefits as part of the wage. It is usually the employee that does not view them as wages. I had a conversation with a young person who worked for us. He wanted a raise. I told him it just was not in the budget at that time. He said but I only make so much a week. I pointed out to him that no he actually made this much a week but I have to take out x amount in taxes and he also recieved insurance and a truck to drive (this was when we did construction) that included gas and insurance. So while he only brought home x amount a week he did not have to pay for all of this out of that amount. He didn't get it.

While yes employees can be replaced the business could not run without someone doing the job so I also need my employees. Do a good job and I have no problems doing the same to them.

I actually agree with you....I'm just saying that most business owners, if they didn't have to pay for a benefit anymore, would reinvest it in the company....or at least that's my take on it over the years.

[JagFan]

I actually agree with you....I'm just saying that most business owners, if they didn't have to pay for a benefit anymore, would reinvest it in the company....or at least that's my take on it over the years.

Some would no doubt.

[JohnnyComeLately]

Re: Why I oppose health care reform in its current incarnation

I don't look forward to spending five years in prison, but I'll do my part for the country.

[Mong Hu]

Pied I did not in my original post speak of conservative or liberal. The term liberal is mentioned only once in the article which I linked and the term conservative is not used at all. Is there doom and gloom? The man is attempting to sound an alarm about the threat large government presents to individual liberty which I think is fair. No one was called a socialist commie in the article nor in my original post. - In my original post, I simply acknowledged that Firebird's post was funny. It was very funny in fact.

The reason I posted the link was in fact to explain my opposition. I am not in favor of being opposed to anything for the sake of being opposed to it either, thus the link. I oppose the current health care reform package because I think it represents exactly the type of expansion of government described in the article as a threat to individual liberty. Perhaps you do not think that the government stepping in to insure some 45 million Americans through a public option (which is what the bill does) represents an expansion of government but to me it clearly does. Further it is clear to me that the intent of the public option is to move the country eventually to a single payer government run system, but perhaps you are not sure that this represents an expansion of government either. - Awesome. Thanks fortaking the time to explain.

My assertion that you are not an open minded independent thinker is not a circular argument at all. I pointed out that you like to think of yourself as open minded and have painted yourself that way on more than one occasion on this board. I pointed out that we all like to think of ourselves that way and present ourselves in that light. I did not go on to say that you are not open minded because I am not but rather that laughing at people with whom you disagree is not indicative of having an open mind, of seriously considering opposing views. - With whom do I disagree? Who was I laughing at? The Fresh Prince of Bel Air?

The most strikingly closed minded portion of your previous posts was the following:

Here you state that what I have posted simply reinforces the common mindset in the Republican party and then go on to say that you have not even read the article. It is the most closed minded and prejudiced statement I have read on this board and I certainly would not have expected it from you. - Super. I take it back, many Republican/Conservative pundits and those who listen to them don't simply blast Obama/the Administration for being....... well the opposition. I defer to Senator Demint:

"If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,"

You say that you are fed up with conservatives who call people liberals (or libs), a term which they, the liberals themselves, originally adopted to describe themselves (now its progressive because no one likes liberals anymore) but yet you are more than willing to laugh right along with those who make light of conservatives for expressing their views. I find this to be disturbing and hypocritical. - Do you know Firebird's political leanings? Who did he vote for inthe last election? Mine? This is the problem I have with the party at this point. It has gone to such a "the other people are the boogey-men mentality it has turned me off.

When people use terms like "libs" or liberal media, are you suggesting they are doing so in a positive way?

Pied, you voted for Obama. Through your vote for President Obama and his policies you are in fact asking for more of the government. I am sorry, but your vote, your actions, speak just as much if not more than anything you have said on this board.

thanks

With whom do you disagree? You disagree with me or at least that has been the tone of your language to this point in this thread. My thoughts are not worth your time because you already know what I am going to say. I am another one of the closed minded Republicans who calls everyone of those that they disagree with a socialist commie. Does this type of language convey that you agree with me in any way or does this type of language show a disdain for me and the views I espouse. And yet you criticize me for calling people liberal.

You expect me to believe that you found Firebird's post funny because it contained the lyrics to a theme song from a sitcom. The very assertion is insulting. You are an intelligent person and understand full well that that post was intended to trivialize my thoughts and beliefs. The post clearly conveys that bird does not think that my thoughts on this matter are worthy of consideration. It was the context in which the lyrics were used that you found amusing because you in fact share the same view.
To be honest, I am not shocked nor particularly interested in reading a long article tellnig me why Mong is opposed to the health care reform.

I could have told you months ago he was. What I would like to read is a clear, non-partisan look at the bill and its impacts. I have no idea if one exists, but am not real interested in one written that simply reinforces a common mindset in the Republican party and other conservatives.
Perhaps later this week, I'll have time to dedicate to it, but not today.

I could quote the entire song here and I am sure it would not draw the same reaction form you or others on the board who disagree with my views. In the words or your favorite comic, cool story bro.

You ask me, do I know Firebird's political leanings or your political leanings? I know them just as well as you know mine (which is to say that I know them from the posts on this board). It might surprise you to know that I am not a Republican. I am 36 and have never registered as a member of either political party. I certainly lean conservative but I am not in favor of free trade and I believe that there is a place for unions. It appears that you may indeed belong to the Republican party because you seem to have the same problem that you claim plagues the GOP (namely "the other people are the boogey-men mentality")

[Mong Hu]

Once again, I don't watch Bill Maher or John Stewart or Keith Olbermann. I've heard enough of them to dismiss them. In addition they don't support my side/point of view.

Heres an analogy that may or may not work.

If I go to a Texas/ou game and am heckled with weak smack talk from sooner fans I dismiss it as them being dumb. It may annoy me but it doesn't surprise me or affect me in any meaningful way. On the other hand, if I see a bunch of Texas fans acting inappropriately, cursing at kids/old women, cheering players as they are removed on a stretcher, etc. I will be embarrased.

If it continues to happen and the leaders and key supporters are vocal inthat way, it would wear on me and may drive me away eventually.

Lucky for me, we have Mack.

Pied,

I like the analogy it is thought provoking. I used to think I was a Dallas Cowboys fan then Jerry took over. Years later, on the occasion of Coach Landry's death, I heard an interview with Tony Dorsett. The reporter asked how Coach Landry had made Dorsett a better player. Tony Dorsett replied that Coach Landry had done more than make him a better player. He said Coach Landry had made him a better son, a better husband, a better father, a better man. I realized then that I was never a Cowboys fan, I was a Tom Landry fan and remain so until this day. I fell in love not with the Cowboys but the ideals which they represented which were embodied in their Coach. The Cowboys changed under Jerry Jones but my love for the ideals of Coach Tom Landry did not fade.

Likewise I have never been Republican. I believe in certain values such as limited government. I believe that the conservative movement as I understand it espouses such values at least to a greater degree than does the liberal left in our country. While some who claim the mantra of conservative or Republican may behave badly it was never the name, the organization, or the person that I was a fan of it was the idea behind the name and my belief in that idea remains. So much in the same way that I was a Tom Landry fan (a fan of the beliefs and life the man lead) not a Cowboys fan I am a conservative and not a Republican.

[slcdragonfan]

For the two of you? Are you self pay? My business pays my husband and mine and then we pay for the kids as with our employees. But for the four of us it is 800.00 a month with a 2500.00 deductibale.

nm

[Mong Hu]

I'm all about the harder working and smarter people getting ahead. Competition is good.

Lonny,

Thanks for taking the time to read the article and respond. I think were our nation gets into trouble is when we see that the harder working, smarter person does not always get ahead. It's not fair and we want things to be fair. Unfortunately working hard doesn't guarantee that you will get ahead in a competitive setting. I think of our starting strong corner this year. The kid has busted his butt for four years. He is 6'1-6'2. He anchored our state qualifying 200m relay last year and ran down state. He is about 170-180 lbs and hits like a Mack Truck. Unfortunately he is the youngest kid in his class. We had a sophomore up on varsity this year who is almost his same age (the sophomore is one of the oldest in his class). As such he had been extremely small both his Freshmen and Sophomore year. He was a B team kid his Freshmen year and a part time starter his sophomore year. His Junior year he was just starting to grow into his body. He started a couple of games for us and played frequently but was not a stand out. By the end of this past summer the entire Defensive coaching staff was looking at this kid and thinking if this kid were a Junior or a Sophomore right now he would be thinking D-1. To make matters worse he didn't even get to play his entire senior year. He missed 4 weeks do to a back injury. He may walk on somewhere and I think if he did he would turn a few heads but he won't get any offers this year. It's not fair but it is how life sometimes works out.

[JohnnyComeLately]

I don't either with the current reform. But what I don't get is the intransigence in saying that what we are doing is the awesomest and bestest ever.

Forgive me if I don't shed a tear for the organization that collected close to $13,000 from me in less than two years in exchange for a couple of antibiotic scrips. I have never understood why I am supposed to put them on a pedastal. At that rate, they better send some money my way if they screw up.

That $13,000 paid for the care of many in need and I thank you. I don't know if the US Government can reduce your $13,000 to $12,000 or care for more people with your $13,000 but lets hope that they can do better than the free market.

[Mong Hu]

Mong, this is wrong. ;) In fact, I vote for general ideas of what I think a candidate will do, what they represent. That much is true for all of us. While voting for Reagan might have been voting for 'less government', how was it voting for Iran/Contra? Voting for Richard Nixon was voting for opening up China and 'law and order', but how was it voting for Watergate? A vote for Clinton would have been a vote for 'Monica'? Very tenuous.

as far as the word change? I am not about to argue the campaign, all I will say is that every Presidential Candidate has offered us some version of 'change' in their campaign. What word is used is not important. Let's just say that American's apparently wanted something very different that what they had been getting.

slcdragon,

I meant to address Iran/Contra and didn't. Iran/Contra has been such an enduring scandal in part because it was not what people thought they had voted for. Reagan had presented himself as a hardliner who did not negotiate with terrorists and here he was caught paying off the Iranians for the release of hostages. I think politicians get into a lot of trouble in these situations, when they turn out not to be what we thought they were when we voted for them. George Bush, "Read my lips no new taxes", has got to be one the best examples of this in recent memory. A vote for George was supposed to be a vote for lower taxes or at least not for higher taxes, it was not and that, at least in part, cost him a second term.

[Mong Hu]

Mung while I applaud your efforts to bring discussion to the board I have to agree with those that comment on where you get your information from.

I believe that the idea of health care reform is a noble and worthy cause but we will not see anything from either side of the isle that is anything more than a boom for the insurance industry. Mark my words, the end result will be full of loop holes for the health insurance carriers while it becomes mandates for the general public. I was hopeful but with out a viable public option this bill will not benefit the public and just imposes more mandates and taxes to those that can least afford them...generally, the diminishing middle class.

Edward Bernays, the father of public relations was quoted as saying, "If you manufacture an authoritative figure, who repeats the same messages over and over, this will appeal to their conscience desires. The unwashed masses will helplessly follow that leader and go along with any message they spout."

Both parties follow this principle. Getting to the truth in any matter of consequence has become virtually impossible because the reality is, the game is stacked, the jig is in and the "unwashed masses" either don't have the time or energy it would take to peel the skin of the onion back enough to find out where the rotten parts are.

I am beginning to believe that no federal funds, tax dollars, grants, tax credits or support should be given to any industry, corporation, church or charitable organization until and if they can prove they are serving the public good. PERIOD, end of story.

For those that want to use the argument in the article to show why free markets are better than public option...let me agree with you on one condition.

Stop all grants, federal tax breaks, government funded, subsides to the agricultural industry, medical or drug companies, all industrial or manufacturing facilities. Separate the commercial banks from the investment banks, require corporations, churches and charitable organizations to prove they are serving the public good as the original laws for this organizations required and do away with all patents and then let the chips fall where they will.

Now, that is really free enterprise...anything short of that is just partisan wrangling and BS to keep the "unwashed masses" subservient to an elitist few.

The end result either way is that the majority of us would be out of work, out of home and out of hope in a very short time.

Cougman,

Where do I get my information from?

I believe it is noble to want to make sure that everyone has access to health care, that everyone is taken care of, but that is not the job of our government. The job of government as described by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence is:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men

This is exactly why I linked the article. We look to government to solve our problems for us rather than provide us the means to deal with our own problems and this is detrimental to the health of a free society.

If we give this responsibility to the government then we must give them the means (taxes) by which to meet the responsibility. The more we ask of them the more we give to them the less free we are. The public option and government run health care, while conceived with the best of intentions, are but one more step down the road to tyranny.

I agree that government funds should not be used to prop up private industry. If we wish to be free to succeed then we must also be free to fail. I am not in favor of subsidies, grants, or any other form of government support for private industry. Once the government starts funding industry the government starts controlling industry and before you know it our government would be running the companies (wait a minute they do run GM, never mind).

I do disagree with you on patents. I think patents are similar to your rights to property. In other words your right to your property is your right to the fruits of your own labor. You should be allowed to profit from your own hard work. A patent then protects your intellectual work, your thought, your idea so that you might profit from this sort of work as well. If it is your idea, your intellectual work, then you should profit from it.

If the end result as you say is that the majority of us would be out of work, out of home and out of hope in a very short time either way then would you rather be our of work, home, and hope, and a slave or out of work, home, and hope, and free. To me I choose freedom.

I disagree that if the government stopped spending that we would all be out of home, work, and hope. I do think that our economy would take a significant hit but I think we would eventually be OK. We survived and indeed prospered before the era of big government and I submit that there is no reason why we wouldn't thrive again. In either case let me go in the deep water I have never been a fan of the shallow end, you can't really swim there.

[Mong Hu]

Here is my experience

Thought I would share my experience with government run health care.s
Last Tuesday my wife pulled my daughter out of school at 2pm and took her, my four year old, two year old, and four month old sons to get the flu shot (wanted to be first in line because the clinic only had 200 doses of the vaccine). I came home from practice at 8pm. At 8:30 my family walked through the door. The efficiency of our government administering the flu shot meant that my four month old son sat outside in a line for almost six hours in 40 degree wether to get his flu shot. He developed a double ear infection. Brilliant. Please tell me again how efficient our government is and how wonderful a government run system will be.

[Firebird]

Thought I would share my experience with government run health care.s
Last Tuesday my wife pulled my daughter out of school at 2pm and took her, my four year old, two year old, and four month old sons to get the flu shot (wanted to be first in line because the clinic only had 200 doses of the vaccine). I came home from practice at 8pm. At 8:30 my family walked through the door. The efficiency of our government administering the flu shot meant that my four month old son sat outside in a line for almost six hours in 40 degree wether to get his flu shot. He developed a double ear infection. Brilliant. Please tell me again how efficient our government is and how wonderful a government run system will be.

So....are you trying to tell me that chilly weather caused an ear infection.

[Dawg Fan]

MONG.......:notworthy

[Firebird]

It might surprise you to know that I am not a Republican. I am 36 and have never registered as a member of either political party.

How many times have you voted for a non-republican candidate? Local, state, national level?

[dragonsdaddy]

That $13,000 paid for the care of many in need and I thank you. I don't know if the US Government can reduce your $13,000 to $12,000 or care for more people with your $13,000 but lets hope that they can do better than the free market.

and lets hope the next hurricane approaching our coastline can be blown astray by the combined power of all the electric fans in louisianna. i'd say the chances of either wish are equal.

[Firebird]

and lets hope the next hurricane approaching our coastline can be blown astray by the combined power of all the electric fans in louisianna. i'd say the chances of either wish are equal.

I would be more willing to take that seriously if the medical market was anything approaching "free." But it's not and hasn't been for decades now. That's why I laugh when I hear the medical industry talk about the virtues of the free market. The unfree market has been pretty good to them.

[dragonsdaddy]

I would be more willing to take that seriously if the medical market was anything approaching "free." But it's not and hasn't been for decades now. That's why I laugh when I hear the oil
/agriculture/pharmaceutical/steel/automobile/etal industry talk about the virtues of the free market. The unfree market has been pretty good to them.

take your pick. i agree, in principle.

[Firebird]

take your pick. i agree, in principle.

I include pharma in medical. I have constantly pointed out the absurdity of complaining about things like unemployment benefits and welfare while swallowing the idea of paying billions of dollars to farmers on general principle. You are right on the rest, too.

[JagFan]

No, dead serious. Will invoke Fresh Prince when I am being sarcastic. Srsly...:)

I would like it noted that the only time I have seen Firebird use the smilies was in a response to me. I am feeling kinda special.:)

[cougmantx]

Cougman,

Where do I get my information from?

I believe it is noble to want to make sure that everyone has access to health care, that everyone is taken care of, but that is not the job of our government. The job of government as described by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence is:



This is exactly why I linked the article. We look to government to solve our problems for us rather than provide us the means to deal with our own problems and this is detrimental to the health of a free society.

If we give this responsibility to the government then we must give them the means (taxes) by which to meet the responsibility. The more we ask of them the more we give to them the less free we are. The public option and government run health care, while conceived with the best of intentions, are but one more step down the road to tyranny.

I agree that government funds should not be used to prop up private industry. If we wish to be free to succeed then we must also be free to fail. I am not in favor of subsidies, grants, or any other form of government support for private industry. Once the government starts funding industry the government starts controlling industry and before you know it our government would be running the companies (wait a minute they do run GM, never mind).

I do disagree with you on patents. I think patents are similar to your rights to property. In other words your right to your property is your right to the fruits of your own labor. You should be allowed to profit from your own hard work. A patent then protects your intellectual work, your thought, your idea so that you might profit from this sort of work as well. If it is your idea, your intellectual work, then you should profit from it.

If the end result as you say is that the majority of us would be out of work, out of home and out of hope in a very short time either way then would you rather be our of work, home, and hope, and a slave or out of work, home, and hope, and free. To me I choose freedom.

I disagree that if the government stopped spending that we would all be out of home, work, and hope. I do think that our economy would take a significant hit but I think we would eventually be OK. We survived and indeed prospered before the era of big government and I submit that there is no reason why we wouldn't thrive again. In either case let me go in the deep water I have never been a fan of the shallow end, you can't really swim there.

I find it interesting that your statement makes the assumption that Governments are the only one that can make a person a slave. Judging from your name I would suggest that many of your ancestors new a little bit about indentured servitude imposed by overbearing and ruthless corporations. Were they free, or was it eventually government regulations that made it possible for a travesty to be corrected or at least made the attempt.

My argument is not for big government but what gets lost in the discussion is that we didn't get here in a vacuum. Government failed us by abolishing regulations imposed to protect us all from "to big to fail" or what has essentially been Russian roulette in the "free markets." What I am suggesting is the markets are not as free as many make out and the government is not the huge boggy man many want to make it.

It is becoming very difficult to tell the difference between the two and I think that is by design. You can not rail against one with out first understanding or at least acknowledging the complacency or, in some cases, the out right capitulation of the other.

I agree with Thomas Jefferson but if you believe that we as a people are truly free then I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly. We have sold our heart and soul to the highest bidder...or worse yet, in our greed forfeited what made us great in the first place...our common humanity.

[E-Vol-ution]

Please state that this is your form of a joke or translate in an intellectual manner how in the heck you can blame the government for this.

Thought I would share my experience with government run health care.s
Last Tuesday my wife pulled my daughter out of school at 2pm and took her, my four year old, two year old, and four month old sons to get the flu shot (wanted to be first in line because the clinic only had 200 doses of the vaccine). I came home from practice at 8pm. At 8:30 my family walked through the door. The efficiency of our government administering the flu shot meant that my four month old son sat outside in a line for almost six hours in 40 degree wether to get his flu shot. He developed a double ear infection. Brilliant. Please tell me again how efficient our government is and how wonderful a government run system will be.

[JagFan]

Please state that this is your form of a joke or translate in an intellectual manner how in the heck you can blame the government for this.

The fact the it was at a clinic (I am assuming government run)and they had to wait 6 hours in the cold to get a simple flu shot.

It's all about the wait.

[Firebird]

I find it interesting that your statement makes the assumption that Governments are the only one that can make a person a slave. Judging from your name I would suggest that many of your ancestors new a little bit about indentured servitude imposed by overbearing and ruthless corporations. Were they free, or was it eventually government regulations that made it possible for a travesty to be corrected or at least made the attempt.

My argument is not for big government but what gets lost in the discussion is that we didn't get here in a vacuum. Government failed us by abolishing regulations imposed to protect us all from "to big to fail" or what has essentially been Russian roulette in the "free markets." What I am suggesting is the markets are not as free as many make out and the government is not the huge boggy man many want to make it.

It is becoming very difficult to tell the difference between the two and I think that is by design. You can not rail against one with out first understanding or at least acknowledging the complacency or, in some cases, the out right capitulation of the other.

I agree with Thomas Jefferson but if you believe that we as a people are truly free then I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly. We have sold our heart and soul to the highest bidder...or worse yet, in our greed forfeited what made us great in the first place...our common humanity.

cougman, you are one of the better, more thoughtful and experienced posters on here. And walking proof that age and experience and success does not automatically mean that you have to be a dittohead, regardless of what we are told repeatedly.

I don't agree with you sometimes, but I especially appreciate your perspective about how all of these problems are inextricably tied to individual moral failings and not only policy decisions that can be parsed out in a political debate along lib/con lines.

[cougmantx]

cougman, you are one of the better, more thoughtful and experienced posters on here. And walking proof that age and experience and success does not automatically mean that you have to be a dittohead, regardless of what we are told repeatedly.

I don't agree with you sometimes, but I especially appreciate your perspective about how all of these problems are inextricably tied to individual moral failings and not only policy decisions that can be parsed out in a political debate along lib/con lines.


Thank you Firebird, you made my day!

[E-Vol-ution]

There's no way in the world it was a federally run health care clinic unless it was on a military base. Waiting 6 hours in the cold is a personal decision.

The fact the it was at a clinic (I am assuming government run)and they had to wait 6 hours in the cold to get a simple flu shot.

It's all about the wait.

[JagFan]

There's no way in the world it was a federally run health care clinic unless it was on a military base. Waiting 6 hours in the cold is a personal decision.

Just my interpretation of his post. It was the wait he was complaining about.

Probably a county or state one. Which a federally run one would be no better. IMO

[svhorns]

Soulda kicked the extra point.

[E-Vol-ution]

It had the heading of being his experience with government run healthcare...........:rolleyes:
Just my interpretation of his post. It was the wait he was complaining about.

Probably a county or state one. Which a federally run one would be no better. IMO

[JagFan]

It had the heading of being his experience with government run healthcare...........:rolleyes:

I consider County and State offices to be part of the government.

My story of state run health care is with my sister in Massachusetts. They moved there several years ago and you are required to show you have insurance and name your GP when you file state income tax returns. In order to get set up with a GP she called and had a 9 month wait for a physical. And she works at Mass General. I really don't see any difference in what the federal government would do and I am sure Mong would not either.

Have you ever tried to get into a county or state run health clinic? Pack your lunch and dinner.

[SWMHebron]

I consider County and State offices to be part of the government.

My story of state run health care is with my sister in Massachusetts. They moved there several years ago and you are required to show you have insurance and name your GP when you file state income tax returns. In order to get set up with a GP she called and had a 9 month wait for a physical. And she works at Mass General. I really don't see any difference in what the federal government would do and I am sure Mong would not either.

Have you ever tried to get into a county or state run health clinic? Pack your lunch and dinner.

No food or drink in the lobby.

[E-Vol-ution]

Okay.....:rolleyes:
I consider County and State offices to be part of the government.

My story of state run health care is with my sister in Massachusetts. They moved there several years ago and you are required to show you have insurance and name your GP when you file state income tax returns. In order to get set up with a GP she called and had a 9 month wait for a physical. And she works at Mass General. I really don't see any difference in what the federal government would do and I am sure Mong would not either.

Have you ever tried to get into a county or state run health clinic? Pack your lunch and dinner.

[Mong Hu]

Pied, let me give you a different scenario. I am a small business owner. My wife worked for me for two years, I had one daughter in college, one in high school. My health care cost ran $1799.00 a month for twelve months and then shot up over $2000 for 12 months. During this time I believe my daughters and wife may have gone for their routine well women check ups and one daughter got strep throat. So realistically I paid $45,558.00 for health care for two years. How much do you think it would have cost me to just pay for the doctors visits...let's just say $5000.00 at the most and I think that would be high. We had to have it though, what if something had really gone bad.

My wife went back to work for another company mostly for the health care benefits. With her being in a lager group they can get some discounts that I couldn't as a much smaller business. My question to you is, does this sound like a level playing ground to you? What does this say about our individual abilities to develope and maintain a buisness. Remember, many don't start buisness with a lot of capital and need everything they have to just to get it off the ground. They really do fly by the seat of their pants.

In this country we always talk about how the small business, the ma and pop operation are the back bone of our economic engine but the reality is they are penalized in many, many ways. They don't have the capitol to move offshore, hire foreign workers, negotiate favorable contracts or such. Many have to fold or lay off staff for the reasons above. Some may say, so be it, it is free market at work. My question is, is it really?

How many of the larger corporations are allowed to offshore, get tax breaks, are subsidized or receive federal money for development and then sell their products of their federally subsidized developments for huge profits?

It is not a fair playing field no matter how you cut it. We talk one thing and walk another.

By the way, the prices that I quoted for health care were with a $2000.00 deductible and that was before I had my heart attack. Hmmmm, wonder what it would cost me now if I could get it?

Cougman,

You payed 45,000 for two years of insurance and had 5,000 dollars of expenses and you believe this is unfair but it is not. It is perfectly fair because you are not buying the insurance for today but rather for a day later when you need it. The insurance companies have hired some actuary who says that on average you will incur so much expense and so therefore need to pay so much in order for the insurance company to make money, which is after all what they are in business to do. Let me tell you my story.

It costs 1000 dollars (apprx) per month to pay for health insurance for my family of four children. (This expense is split roughly 50/50 between myself and my employer. Half comes directly from my paycheck and the other half I never see on any pay-stub but is rather given to me as a benefit) so it costs roughly 12,000 dollars per year for our insurance. Over the past six years my wife and I have been blessed with four children. Our first child was born with no complications. The insurance picked up about 36,000 dollars for that birth.

While my wife was attempting to deliver our second child complications arose. My son turned sideways entering the birth canal. He was trying to come out shoulder first and was stuck. The doctors had to perform and emergency C section. Each birth since has also been a C section and cost between 40-45 thousand dollars (this is the some that the insurance company paid for as explained in our EOB's). In short this amounts to medical bills paid by our insurance that add up to approximately 155 thousand dollars for the births of our four children.

This does not include the cost of caring for my daughters broken arm last year, the two EEG's my daughter has required in her short first six years, the trip to the ER when my 3rd child decided to play paratrooper out of our swing set with out a parachute, the trip to the ER with my second after the third decided to see what impact a brio train bridge would have on his brothers face (4 or 5 stitches across his upper lip was the impact), my thirds hernia operation which took place just last week, my dental surgery which was required after I developed a crack in a tooth as a result of prior dental work. (Different policy but I included the amount paid for that coverage as part of the 1000 per month) All in all our insurance has paid out between 180 and 200 thousand dollars over the past six years. At 12,000 per year it would take 16 to 18 years of paying premiums before our insurance company could expect to make money on me (that is if I don't include the cost that they incur to manage and operate my plan) and that is if we incurred no further expenses which as you might have surmised given my third child is not likely.

Given the numbers I have just gone through I do not feel that the insurance company is ripping me off. My insurance is not cheap but it is fair (in fact it has been a great deal for me the past few years). You can not take a snap shot of two years and say that insurance is fair or not fair that is not how the insurance game works. Your own post indicates this in as much as you referenced your own medical problems (your heart attack). How much were those bills? (Please don't answer the question. It was intended to be rhetorical. I don't want to be asking such personal questions with any expectation that they should be answered) I assume they were hefty. (By the way I am glad you are here to have this discussion I hope the old ticker is still doing OK and you have had a good recovery. Makes me worry a little about what Katy will do to you in the playoffs this year though) If this year we only go to the doctor a few times and only incur minor expenses which do not exceed the 12000 that we will pay for insurance this year (which I hope and pray is the case) the cost will still be fair.

Now perhaps you are not claiming that the expenses are unfair but rather that medicine is just too expensive. In this case I would submit that the current health care legislation does little to lower the expense in fact it does a great deal to increase it. The current health care legislation intends not to lower the expense but rather to spread it around to a greater number of people (thus lowering the cost per individual but doing nothing to decrease the liability of our society as a whole). I would submit that this would increase the societal expense for two primary reasons. First there would be an increased demand for an increased number of medical services (more people insured) with out, at least in the short term, an increased supply (Doctors and nurses take a long time to train). Second there would be deeper pockets to pay for an increase in cost, in short the increased demand would result in higher prices that the medical industry would be only to happy to charge (because they could) especially in light of our increased ability to pay them (more people in the pool i.e. all the American Tax Payers).

Let me take a moment to ask a serious question, why has the cost of health care gone up so dramatically in recent years? When we can answer this question then perhaps we can more effectively deal with the high cost of medicine in this country. If we are unhappy with the cost of medicine then why are we trying to figure out a better way in which to continue to pay for the high cost (ie spread the cost out to more people)? Let us figure out a way to make it cheaper. Perhaps this is tort reform, perhaps it is training more medical professionals, perhaps it is the most traditional of market reforms, stop paying the higher prices, they will come down, perhaps it is some other reform but I would submit that it is not continuing to pay the higher prices.

[Mong Hu]

Pied, let me give you a different scenario. I am a small business owner. My wife worked for me for two years, I had one daughter in college, one in high school. My health care cost ran $1799.00 a month for twelve months and then shot up over $2000 for 12 months. During this time I believe my daughters and wife may have gone for their routine well women check ups and one daughter got strep throat. So realistically I paid $45,558.00 for health care for two years. How much do you think it would have cost me to just pay for the doctors visits...let's just say $5000.00 at the most and I think that would be high. We had to have it though, what if something had really gone bad.

My wife went back to work for another company mostly for the health care benefits. With her being in a lager group they can get some discounts that I couldn't as a much smaller business. My question to you is, does this sound like a level playing ground to you? What does this say about our individual abilities to develope and maintain a buisness. Remember, many don't start buisness with a lot of capital and need everything they have to just to get it off the ground. They really do fly by the seat of their pants.

In this country we always talk about how the small business, the ma and pop operation are the back bone of our economic engine but the reality is they are penalized in many, many ways. They don't have the capitol to move offshore, hire foreign workers, negotiate favorable contracts or such. Many have to fold or lay off staff for the reasons above. Some may say, so be it, it is free market at work. My question is, is it really?

How many of the larger corporations are allowed to offshore, get tax breaks, are subsidized or receive federal money for development and then sell their products of their federally subsidized developments for huge profits?

It is not a fair playing field no matter how you cut it. We talk one thing and walk another.

By the way, the prices that I quoted for health care were with a $2000.00 deductible and that was before I had my heart attack. Hmmmm, wonder what it would cost me now if I could get it?

You claim that this expense places an unfair burden on small business and puts them at a competitive disadvantage. I disagree. What puts them at a competitive disadvantage is the resources they have at their disposal. In other words big companies have an advantage because they make more money. They can buy more of everything they need to compete. They can afford the latest technology. They can attract better workers with higher pay and yes better benefits. This does not represent a playing field that is not level it represents competitors who are not equal and that is a very different concept all together.

To illustrate the point I offer the following example from the world of sports. A few years ago we played a team in the first round of the playoffs who was bigger, faster, and stronger than we were. They played all the way to the final weekend and lost in the state championship game. Did they have a competitive advantage? Yes they were bigger, faster, and stronger than we were. Was the playing field level? Absolutely, they played by the same rules we did. They could not hold, clip, or grab our face-masks any more than we could theirs. Could they push us all over the field? Yes, and they did for 48 minutes.

Smaller companies are allowed to offshore, they do get tax breaks and are subsidized or receive federal money for development. Smaller companies do not offshore not because they are not allowed too but rather because they can't. Smaller companies may and do receive tax breaks, subsidies, and grants for development projects but just not as much because they can not provide as much. Smaller companies are not penalized they just don't have the competitive advantage of being big. (By the way being big is not always a competitive advantage. Sometimes being small is a competitive advantage.)

[Mong Hu]

Pied, let me give you a different scenario. I am a small business owner. My wife worked for me for two years, I had one daughter in college, one in high school. My health care cost ran $1799.00 a month for twelve months and then shot up over $2000 for 12 months. During this time I believe my daughters and wife may have gone for their routine well women check ups and one daughter got strep throat. So realistically I paid $45,558.00 for health care for two years. How much do you think it would have cost me to just pay for the doctors visits...let's just say $5000.00 at the most and I think that would be high. We had to have it though, what if something had really gone bad.

My wife went back to work for another company mostly for the health care benefits. With her being in a lager group they can get some discounts that I couldn't as a much smaller business. My question to you is, does this sound like a level playing ground to you? What does this say about our individual abilities to develope and maintain a buisness. Remember, many don't start buisness with a lot of capital and need everything they have to just to get it off the ground. They really do fly by the seat of their pants.

In this country we always talk about how the small business, the ma and pop operation are the back bone of our economic engine but the reality is they are penalized in many, many ways. They don't have the capitol to move offshore, hire foreign workers, negotiate favorable contracts or such. Many have to fold or lay off staff for the reasons above. Some may say, so be it, it is free market at work. My question is, is it really?

How many of the larger corporations are allowed to offshore, get tax breaks, are subsidized or receive federal money for development and then sell their products of their federally subsidized developments for huge profits?

It is not a fair playing field no matter how you cut it. We talk one thing and walk another.

By the way, the prices that I quoted for health care were with a $2000.00 deductible and that was before I had my heart attack. Hmmmm, wonder what it would cost me now if I could get it?


You asked do we have a free market? Yes, we do, (it's actually a mixed economy but we have always leaned more heavily towards a free than a command economy at least up until now) but this is not to say that it is anarchy. I am not a proponent of Laissez-faire capitalism. I believe we need to have some regulation. I, however, would not use this as an excuse to throw away the free market system and turn to a centrally planned command economy (which is the direction that the current proposed health care legislation takes us in, not saying that it turns us into a command economy but moves us in that direction). To say that we have, and in fact IMHO need, some regulation is not a valid excuse to institute even more regulation. It seems from your comments that you say we don't have free markets anyway so regulate away because the free market is a myth. I disagree with this line of thought. I want to be as free as possible understanding that I will have to give up some freedom in order to reap the benefits of living in a society. This is necessary because of the character of man.

[cougmantx]

Mong, I would like very much to address some of your points but unfortunately I am packing to go to Virginia. You see, I work (contract) for several of those insurance carriers and right now there are claims to be worked.

Hopefully I can get back to address this in some manner soon.

[pied]

I read the article. Interesting that it was adapted from a speech given on a Cruise ship from Venice to Athens.

I agree with a lot of the article. In a perfect world, we'd be able to do quite a bit. I disagree with some of it, specifically some of the examples used to make someof the points. Here is one:

But is there any difference between being forced to save for retirement and being forced to save for housing or for my child’s education or for any other perceived good? None whatsoever. Yet for government to force us to do such things is to treat us as children rather than as rational citizens in possession of equal and inalienable natural rights.

First, the government is already forcing you to save for your kids education through taxes. If you are speaking about higher education, I would still disagree to an extent while understanding the point. While a lofty goal, we are siply not living in 1809 or 1909. The world is a diffeernt place.

We simply are not an agrarian society able to keep grandma/grandpa in the extra room. People will grow older on average than they did during those times and will be unable to work. If they are unable to earn a wage and the family unit we have no longer supports their care, I would argue that it is in our best interests to find a common solution. This is different to me than forcing people to save for a college education. Perhaps not in principle, but in reality it is.



I would suggest it is similar to the health care debate. For most of us, we agree there will be some sort of common healthcare. Ex. you are in an acident and the paramedics should treat you and not leave you on the road whether or not you have insurance. So then it moves from an "if" question to one of "how much".

Walter Williams appears to be arguing the "why" question and saying no the government should not tax you to pay for someone injured in an accident. Of course he is not talking directly to the health care debate, but that is your comparison as for why you are against it.

[pied]

After reading the article, I still think that Firebird's post still is the post of the week.

[dragonsdaddy]

After reading the article, I still think that Firebird's post still is the post of the week.

cool assertion, bro.

[BDB]

After reading the article, I still think that Firebird's post still is the post of the week.

this. i came back to read it a few times. i kept thinking i was going crazy.

[Mong Hu]

Mong, I would like very much to address some of your points but unfortunately I am packing to go to Virginia. You see, I work (contract) for several of those insurance carriers and right now there are claims to be worked.

Hopefully I can get back to address this in some manner soon.

Cougman,

I look forward to your response. I very much appreciate reading your responses. You provoke me to think and that is the point of the entire exercise for me. I argue from my perspective and try to refute your points but that does not mean I am not thinking and considering what you have to say. In truth most of what gets seriously discussed on this board dominates much of my thought as I strive to gain a better understanding of the issues facing our country. I actually incorporate some of what gets discussed here into my classes.

I hope your journey is safe and productive and that you return safe and sound to God's country (aka TEXAS in particular Katy Tiger Land).

God's Speed,
Mong Hu

[Mong Hu]

After reading the article, I still think that Firebird's post still is the post of the week.

Very well,

Thanks for reading the article and commenting on it. Pied I really do think you are an intelligent poster and your insights are some of the ones that I look forward to hearing the most. I do not agree with everything in the article either, as I said in my original post, but the heart of what he is trying to say is a big part of why I do not like the current health care proposal. I am thinking about your post commenting on the article and will probably have something coming back at you either by the end of today or tomorrow.

Thanks for your thoughtful consideration and commentary,
Mong Hu

[Mong Hu]

I find it interesting that your statement makes the assumption that Governments are the only one that can make a person a slave. Judging from your name I would suggest that many of your ancestors new a little bit about indentured servitude imposed by overbearing and ruthless corporations. Were they free, or was it eventually government regulations that made it possible for a travesty to be corrected or at least made the attempt.

My argument is not for big government but what gets lost in the discussion is that we didn't get here in a vacuum. Government failed us by abolishing regulations imposed to protect us all from "to big to fail" or what has essentially been Russian roulette in the "free markets." What I am suggesting is the markets are not as free as many make out and the government is not the huge boggy man many want to make it.

It is becoming very difficult to tell the difference between the two and I think that is by design. You can not rail against one with out first understanding or at least acknowledging the complacency or, in some cases, the out right capitulation of the other.

I agree with Thomas Jefferson but if you believe that we as a people are truly free then I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly. We have sold our heart and soul to the highest bidder...or worse yet, in our greed forfeited what made us great in the first place...our common humanity.

I made no such assumption (the choice offered was to have a big government that controls us if by no other means than that we have to give up such an amount of our property to support the government so as to render our freedoms meaningless or a small government that only protects our freedoms) and my ancestors were Welsh,German, and Irish, try again.

The argument for a public option is in fact an argument for big government and you and I agree that our government let companies get too big although I don't believe that they were too big to fail. I think that argument is fallacious and the government bail out was nothing more than a power grab by big government even if it was well intentioned.

Are you arguing that we need health care reform because of the recent financial crisis or that the two are some how related?

Notice that you said GOVERNMENT FAILED US let that linger a bit while you consider that you are arguing for handing over 1/6 of our nations economy to them as well as our personal health.

Further the government is the bogey man. How many people have companies, businessmen, and cooperations killed through the years as opposed to Hitler, Stalin, the Khmer Rouge, Saddam Hussein, Mao Zedong, etc. in the 20th century alone? Our founding fathers got this and that is why they established a limited government and gave us the right to keep and bear arms.

I have no problem railing against big business and big government. (Please point me to where I have said that big business is the savior of man kind or even that big business is good for our country) I am not a proponent of big business. From your comments I would surmise that you certainly have a healthy distrust of both and yet you wish to give more money and more power to our government through the public option which they will then in turn pay out that money to big businesses (such as the 2 billion that they recently paid out for flue vaccines to companies such as Sanofi-Pastuer, a large international drug company from France) making businesses even larger and more powerful. So how is this helping the problem?

No you don't agree with Thomas Jefferson if you believe that our government should provide health care. Jefferson thought that the government's job was to protect our unalienable rights, not to provide health care. Jefferson clearly sought to limit government and in fact thought that the government was too big and powerful in his day as is evidenced by the record of his own Presidential administration. Jefferson is rolling over in his grave right now no doubt although he certainly foresaw this eventuality.

I do believe we are free and it is sad that you do not. It is no wonder that you are so willing to allow the government to do what it pleases with your property if this is truly how you believe. I suspect however that you act as a free man. I suspect that use your property as best you see fit to live your life according to your own values and further that you chafe under the efforts of others be they the government or your own neighbors to get you to do otherwise. This is because you are a free man. It is in fact our natural state to be free. This freedom is not taken away but rather only relinquished willingly so that we might partake in the benefits that society offers.

I think, however, the thing that I disagree with most in your entire post is the last sentence.
We have sold our heart and soul to the highest bidder...or worse yet, in our greed forfeited what made us great in the first place...our common humanity.
Our common humanity is not what has made us great. It has been our ability to overcome and deal with our common humanity (perhaps better than any that have come before us) that has made this country great. You hit the nail on the head when you described us as greedy. I would further describe human beings as selfish and on occasion hateful. This is our human nature and it has not made us great. The genius behind our system of government and its marriage to the capitalist economic system is that it takes into account these shortcomings in our human nature and in fact uses them to our advantage.

I believe that this is one of the greatest failings of the communist system. It begins with a faulty assumption about our very nature. Communism assumes that at its heart humanity is good and if you take away the artificial constructs of society such as property and religion then we will achieve a utopian society where in fact no government is needed. This assumption doomed communism to failure. Our system assumes humans are greedy and selfish and plans accordingly.

[Mong Hu]

Please state that this is your form of a joke or translate in an intellectual manner how in the heck you can blame the government for this.

I am sorry that you fail to understand how a government that has devoted 2 billion dollars to purchasing 250 million doses of flu vaccine (which is almost enough to inoculate the entire population of the United States) has something to do with distributing flu vaccine through the CDC (Center for Disease Control) with the assistance of local Health Departments. Please tell me that you are just feigning ignorance here. The current flu vaccine shortages (which is why my kids stood in line for 6 hours) are a classic example of government inefficiency. Other than that I think Jagmom did a great job of explaining it to you.

[pied]

No you don't agree with Thomas Jefferson if you believe that our government should provide health care. Jefferson thought that the government's job was to protect our unalienable rights, not to provide health care. Jefferson clearly sought to limit government and in fact thought that the government was too big and powerful in his day as is evidenced by the record of his own Presidential administration. Jefferson is rolling over in his grave right now no doubt although he certainly foresaw this eventuality.

Was education an unalienable right?



When the Virginia General Assembly granted the charter for the University of Virginia in 1819, it appropriated only $15,000 for the fledgling institution. To ensure the success of his endeavor, University founder Thomas Jefferson provided an additional $40,000 he had raised from friends and fellow champions of higher learning.

http://campaign.virginia.edu/atf/cf/%7B60e98f9d-457d-4c0b-aabf-2ff9f94f708c%7D/financingTheUniversity.pdf

[svhorns]

While I do not agree with every political and economic belief of the author much of what he says presents well my thoughts and concerns regarding the current health care debate. The article is worth a read if you have time and care to engage in deeper thought about the relationship of liberty and property rights. I realize that many do not care to engage in political discussions on the board but we have just finished our playoff run up here in the frozen north (we lost in the second round on a failed 2 point conversion with 17 seconds left in the game) and I need some distraction from my woes and sorrows. So if you do not wish to engage in this type of discussion please move to another thread. This is, after all, the yard and politics is just as off topic as "Man Law". If you would care to read the article and comment then by all means enjoy.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=09

Ya'll are getting way off topic. Again I ask, why not kick the extra point?

[Mong Hu]

Soulda kicked the extra point.

Thanks svhorns for noting my pain. You are the only one who has seemed to take note of it. We definitely did the right thing going for two. Our kicker was coming of an injury to his kicking leg. He left our first extra-point attempt short. We went for two after the second score and were successful. We attempted a field goal from the 4 yard-line and the snap went high. (Our snapper had also been having difficulties all day keeping his snaps down on punt as well. During the second half our offense had been really struggling to move the ball so the prospect of overtime was troubling. We decided to try and seize the little bit of momentum that we had and end the game in the last 17 seconds on the two point conversion. We missed. :mad:

[svhorns]

Thanks svhorns for noting my pain. You are the only one who has seemed to take note of it. We definitely did the right thing going for two. Our kicker was coming of an injury to his kicking leg. He left our first extra-point attempt short. We went for two after the second score and were successful. We attempted a field goal from the 4 yard-line and the snap went high. (Our snapper had also been having difficulties all day keeping his snaps down on punt as well. During the second half our offense had been really struggling to move the ball so the prospect of overtime was troubling. We decided to try and seize the little bit of momentum that we had and end the game in the last 17 seconds on the two point conversion. We missed. :mad:

I feel your pain. Smithson Valley did the same thing in a playoff game against San Marcos(2006). We were heavily favored in the game but that year they ran a very effective wishbone and we could not stop it. We decided to go for two to win but failed. We were bounced in the first round of the playoffs.

[Firebird]

Internet=serious business, and none of you should ever forget it.

[Mong Hu]

this. i came back to read it a few times. i kept thinking i was going crazy.

You are going crazy BDB but that has nothing to do with the article. It has been happening for a while now.:rolleyes:

[pied]

I consider County and State offices to be part of the government.

My story of state run health care is with my sister in Massachusetts. They moved there several years ago and you are required to show you have insurance and name your GP when you file state income tax returns. In order to get set up with a GP she called and had a 9 month wait for a physical. And she works at Mass General. I really don't see any difference in what the federal government would do and I am sure Mong would not either.

Have you ever tried to get into a county or state run health clinic? Pack your lunch and dinner.


Probably lots of factors, but I saw this on the news this AM:


list of healthiest states:


2009 STATE RANKINGS
1 Vermont
2 Utah
3 MAssachusets
4 Hawaii
5 New Hampshire

http://www.americashealthrankings.org/2009/2009_State_Rankings.pdf

[JagFan]

Probably lots of factors, but I saw this on the news this AM:


list of healthiest states:



http://www.americashealthrankings.org/2009/2009_State_Rankings.pdf

Yes they are very healthy in Massachusetts. They have to be. You can't get in to see your doctor:eek:

[GoOwls]

Probably lots of factors, but I saw this on the news this AM:


list of healthiest states:



http://www.americashealthrankings.org/2009/2009_State_Rankings.pdf

Geeze, arguing with pied is like paint by numbers.

Wealthy state....people can afford what ever form of diet/weight loss program/exercise program/eating well program that yo can think of.....they are more enlightened in the New England states...right....of course they are healthier.....paint by numbers.

[Firebird]

Geeze, arguing with pied is like paint by numbers.

Wealthy state....people can afford what ever form of diet/weight loss program/exercise program/eating well program that yo can think of.....they are more enlightened in the New England states...right....of course they are healthier.....paint by numbers.

Why are wealthier states, on average, more liberal? Why are poorer states, on average, more conservative? Why do the people who hate the gummint the most live in places that most benefit from federal tax dollars.

[pied]

Geeze, arguing with pied is like paint by numbers.

Wealthy state....people can afford what ever form of diet/weight loss program/exercise program/eating well program that yo can think of.....they are more enlightened in the New England states...right....of course they are healthier.....paint by numbers.

Sounds like you are listing several factors that I stated. I woudl not agree however that the people in New England are more enlightend though.

[GoOwls]

Sounds like you are listing several factors that I stated. I woudl not agree however that the people in New England are more enlightend though.

perception is reality...unfortunately.

[pied]

perception is reality...unfortunately.

So all post office workers are nut jobs?

[GoOwls]

Why are wealthier states, on average, more liberal? Why are poorer states, on average, more conservative? Why do the people who hate the gummint the most live in places that most benefit from federal tax dollars.

Then why are the Republican alway labeled the rich fat cats......the libs have more money than the Repiublicans do.....as I've said many times....perception is reality.