Now that healthcare has passed, what’s next on Obama’s agenda? Many believe the next item on his presidential agenda will be Immigration Reform. I tend to agree for this reason and this reason alone. Granting Amnesty to the millions of illegal aliens currently residing in the U.S. could send more votes his way in the next election. Granting Amnesty along with expedited naturalization status, thus giving former illegal’s the right to vote, would guarantee a win in the next presidential election. Now, many of you may say, “He cannot grant amnesty and naturalization in one fell swoop”. My feelings on the subject are that while I believe it would be gross misuses of power on his part to do so, I no longer believe it to be impossible. The passage of healthcare should attest to that. Now, that last statement is pure speculation on my part. It just makes logical sense that immediate or at the very least, expedited naturalization would be slipped in there along side amnesty…just in time for them to vote in the next presidential elections. Now keep in mind, states have the power to determine their voting criteria. In California, convicted felons can vote from prison so again, it would make sense that states with a high number of illegal immigrants residing in them (primarily Democratic states) would grant these new citizens the right to vote.
I will say that since America has been a beacon of freedom for other countries, I cannot in all good conscience say that we should restrict or prohibit immigration. But that’s just it. I don’t think that anyone is really debating that. The problem is that there are those here illegally who do not pay taxes and use the entitlement programs that are supposed to be reserved for U.S. citizens. Some feel that granting Amnesty would be like giving your child a cookie after he stole money out of your wallet. So I believe many of those who oppose Amnesty are standing on principle rather than a racial standpoint. That’s not to say that some aren’t just racists, but I think they are in the minority.
Voting polls show that minorities tend to lean more Democratic than Republican. Statistically speaking, it is the minority groups who are on the receiving end of the entitlement programs like welfare so it makes sense that they would support a Democratic candidate. Entitlements are like “crack” for the masses. People tend to vote for the candidate who promises the most “crack” from the government. I don’t mean just with the entitlement programs. I mean tax cuts and credits as well. The EIC is a great example, which I believe was a Republican idea. Are you beginning to see that it’s not a clear cut case of Democrat v/s Republican? Both parties are racing to see who can garner the most support and control and they all make promises that are designed to sway your vote one way or the other. Sometimes it comes down to a choice between the lesser of two evils. In this case granting illegal immigrant’s amnesty, will win many votes to the Democrats. In other words, amnesty is being used as a means to an end. If this happens, I believe that Obama will be with us for a lot longer than we anticipated. Definitely the greater evil in my opinion. A lot of damage can be done over that long a period and at the rate we are going, we may not get another chance to vote him out of office. While this sounds very dire, the fact is, IT IS. People need to wake up and see what’s going on. Our nation has become apathetic and dependent. 50 years ago, people utilized credit to get things like a modest home, a car or to help finance college tuition. Today we are told that we should have it all, regardless of cost and whether or not we have worked hard to earn these things. There are many of you out there who have played by the rules, paid your bills on time and not lived outside of your means. But the fact is, we ALL contribute to the corruption of our nation by continuously electing our leaders based on the “crack factor”. It’s an easy sell and such an easy pill to swallow. It’s easy to justify and even easier accept the security net that the government tells us we need in order to keep from failing. They have given us just enough rope to hang ourselves. It is time to face reality and pay up. Stop believing their lies of entitlement. Accept that we are part of the problem and then make the changes necessary to put our nation back on track. It’s not too late…yet.
Apathy is of no benefit. Fear of failure is no longer an acceptable excuse. There was a time when failure inspired us to try harder. It was Thomas Edison who said “I did not fail; I merely discovered 100 that didn't work.” It was men like Ben Franklin who helped to make this country great. After our forefathers met to deliberate at the constitutional convention, Franklin was asked by a woman; “What have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” to which he replied “A republic, if you can keep it.” This is what we are in danger of losing. To those of you who don’t understand exactly what I mean, I ask you to look at our history and how hard we fought in order to gain and protect our freedom. Afterwards, ask yourself if you are truly willing to sit back and watch as it is destroyed.
I will leave you with another quote by Benjamin Franklin, one that I believe we should all keep in mind; “Anyone who trades his liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security.”
Monday, March 29, 2010
There's Nothing Common About Sense
If you only had 15 dollars in your checking account, would you go out and spend 30 dollars for dinner? No, of course you wouldn’t. Common sense dictates that we cannot spend more money than we have. So why do we believe our government when they tell us that we can “Spend our way to prosperity”? This applies to both our Democratic and our Republican leaders. President Bush claimed eminent catastrophe unless we bailed out Bear Stearns. President Obama claimed the same thing would happen unless we bailed out the banking and car industries. The only thing that was accomplished was to delay the inevitable. By circumventing the natural consequences of bad business practices, we merely enabled these practices to continue and allowed the government to further work its way into the private sector. Disaster averted, but for how long and to what end?
Let’s talk about the economic stimulus packages. Bush borrowed money from China in hopes that distributing this money would inspire Americans to go out and buy things, thus stimulating the economy. While nobody I know failed to cash their checks, what exactly did this accomplish? Sure, many Americans went on shopping sprees and paid bills with their money, but what happened when the money was gone? We were right back in the same place where we started. So wouldn’t common sense tell you that the economic stimulus created was actually false? Obama, rather than using borrowed money, decided to stimulate the economy by giving stimulus credits. This met with the same end as what Bush had tried to do. Isn’t the definition of insanity; doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Look at reality, you cannot create false market and expect it to be sustainable. Simply saying that something is worth 400,000 does not make it so anymore than sticking feathers up my ass would make me a chicken. At some point, it will come crashing down. All the government control and intervention will not be able to stop it. So why are we sitting idly by while our government is leaving us to foot the bill for their insane attempts to maintain the false value of the market?
Wouldn’t it be safe to say or even assume that if a financial strategy would not work for your household, it also will not work for the government? If you have credit card debt and you only pay the minimum amount due, the interest compounded will soon add up to an amount that you just cannot repay. That is about where the American economy is right now and instead of demonstrating fiscal responsibility, they are still trying to grow the government at our expense. How does this make sense?
Let’s talk about the economic stimulus packages. Bush borrowed money from China in hopes that distributing this money would inspire Americans to go out and buy things, thus stimulating the economy. While nobody I know failed to cash their checks, what exactly did this accomplish? Sure, many Americans went on shopping sprees and paid bills with their money, but what happened when the money was gone? We were right back in the same place where we started. So wouldn’t common sense tell you that the economic stimulus created was actually false? Obama, rather than using borrowed money, decided to stimulate the economy by giving stimulus credits. This met with the same end as what Bush had tried to do. Isn’t the definition of insanity; doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Look at reality, you cannot create false market and expect it to be sustainable. Simply saying that something is worth 400,000 does not make it so anymore than sticking feathers up my ass would make me a chicken. At some point, it will come crashing down. All the government control and intervention will not be able to stop it. So why are we sitting idly by while our government is leaving us to foot the bill for their insane attempts to maintain the false value of the market?
Wouldn’t it be safe to say or even assume that if a financial strategy would not work for your household, it also will not work for the government? If you have credit card debt and you only pay the minimum amount due, the interest compounded will soon add up to an amount that you just cannot repay. That is about where the American economy is right now and instead of demonstrating fiscal responsibility, they are still trying to grow the government at our expense. How does this make sense?
More On Politics
I do not define my political view as either Democratic or Republican. I have some liberal social views but I have fiscally conservative views as well. I do not claim to have any definitive answers to our current problems, but I do think there are a number of possible solutions that haven’t been explored due to single mindedness of those in congress. Do I believe that everyone needs health insurance? Yes, I do. Do I believe the government is responsible for providing it? No I do not. That is my answer and no matter how you try to phrase it or distort it’s meaning, I will never deviate from that principle.
I am and will always be responsible for myself and my family. I believe that working hard is something to be proud of and that sitting around collecting a government check when you are fully capable of working, should be looked down upon. If you are able to work and earn a living, then you should. There are some truly helpless individuals out there who genuinely need assistance and I am in no way looking down my nose at these people. I think the current programs available were designed for these individuals. I do, however, believe there should be limits to prevent people from living off this kind of system. I don’t mean that someone should get welfare and after two years they should be cut off. That doesn’t help anyone at all. Not the person receiving welfare or the community in which they live. What I am saying is that while someone is receiving welfare, they should be required to attend some type of school or skill training so that when they can, they will be able to provide for themselves and their families. I think that in order to receive welfare, it should be agreed upon that once you are able, perhaps 2% of your income should be taxed over a 2-5 year period to go towards helping others who are in the situation you were in. That would make it like a “pay it forward” type of system. It would be completely voluntary on the part of the person applying for welfare. If you want it, you will get it, but you will then agree to give back to your community once you are in a position to do so. That may help with government funding but it also prevents others from taking advantage of a program that was meant to be a “hand up” not a “hand out”. Maybe I’m making it less complicated than it really is, but I try to operate on the KISS principle – Keep It Simple Stupid!
Now, nobody would disagree that the healthcare system could use some work. But what many fail to recognize is that the current government debate is not about healthcare. It’s not about the American people at all. The Democratic/Progressive agenda is about gaining a socialistic foothold to expand on. It has been happening so gradually that we haven’t noticed until now. Taking over healthcare was the next logical step. Take a look at world history and compare Obama’s strategy with that of Hitler and tell me you don’t see some striking similarities. Sometime around 1938, the United Socialist party and the Communist party were in a power struggle so the people of Austria petitioned on their own behalf, to be allowed to choose what government they wanted. An election was held. This was all happening during an economically depressed time for Austria. The people were faced with high unemployment rates, sickness and starvation. Hitler promised jobs for all, healthcare and education. A vote for Hitler meant that the suffering would end and the basic needs of the people would be met. He was elected by a landslide vote because the country was desperate and Hitler delivered on his promises. Austria got much more than they bargained for. The changes didn’t come overnight, but gradually, all aspects of private industry came under government regulation and control. Religion was taken out of schools and replaced with political propaganda. Children were indoctrinated by the public school system. People were told what jobs they would have and how much they would make. In time, Hitler became an infamous dictator and is remembered as such today. During his time in power, he, his administration and military committed the atrocities that will be remembered for all time. Keep in mind though, those things came later, after he had his roots firmly planted and the people had no way to fight back. These are bold statements but you cannot deny that the parallels exist.
This may be an extremist point of view. I am not willing to take that risk however. I refuse to sacrifice my freedom (not even a little) or that of my family and everyone else I know, just because someone is promising me a softer, easier way. These things always come with a price no matter what you want to believe.
I am and will always be responsible for myself and my family. I believe that working hard is something to be proud of and that sitting around collecting a government check when you are fully capable of working, should be looked down upon. If you are able to work and earn a living, then you should. There are some truly helpless individuals out there who genuinely need assistance and I am in no way looking down my nose at these people. I think the current programs available were designed for these individuals. I do, however, believe there should be limits to prevent people from living off this kind of system. I don’t mean that someone should get welfare and after two years they should be cut off. That doesn’t help anyone at all. Not the person receiving welfare or the community in which they live. What I am saying is that while someone is receiving welfare, they should be required to attend some type of school or skill training so that when they can, they will be able to provide for themselves and their families. I think that in order to receive welfare, it should be agreed upon that once you are able, perhaps 2% of your income should be taxed over a 2-5 year period to go towards helping others who are in the situation you were in. That would make it like a “pay it forward” type of system. It would be completely voluntary on the part of the person applying for welfare. If you want it, you will get it, but you will then agree to give back to your community once you are in a position to do so. That may help with government funding but it also prevents others from taking advantage of a program that was meant to be a “hand up” not a “hand out”. Maybe I’m making it less complicated than it really is, but I try to operate on the KISS principle – Keep It Simple Stupid!
Now, nobody would disagree that the healthcare system could use some work. But what many fail to recognize is that the current government debate is not about healthcare. It’s not about the American people at all. The Democratic/Progressive agenda is about gaining a socialistic foothold to expand on. It has been happening so gradually that we haven’t noticed until now. Taking over healthcare was the next logical step. Take a look at world history and compare Obama’s strategy with that of Hitler and tell me you don’t see some striking similarities. Sometime around 1938, the United Socialist party and the Communist party were in a power struggle so the people of Austria petitioned on their own behalf, to be allowed to choose what government they wanted. An election was held. This was all happening during an economically depressed time for Austria. The people were faced with high unemployment rates, sickness and starvation. Hitler promised jobs for all, healthcare and education. A vote for Hitler meant that the suffering would end and the basic needs of the people would be met. He was elected by a landslide vote because the country was desperate and Hitler delivered on his promises. Austria got much more than they bargained for. The changes didn’t come overnight, but gradually, all aspects of private industry came under government regulation and control. Religion was taken out of schools and replaced with political propaganda. Children were indoctrinated by the public school system. People were told what jobs they would have and how much they would make. In time, Hitler became an infamous dictator and is remembered as such today. During his time in power, he, his administration and military committed the atrocities that will be remembered for all time. Keep in mind though, those things came later, after he had his roots firmly planted and the people had no way to fight back. These are bold statements but you cannot deny that the parallels exist.
This may be an extremist point of view. I am not willing to take that risk however. I refuse to sacrifice my freedom (not even a little) or that of my family and everyone else I know, just because someone is promising me a softer, easier way. These things always come with a price no matter what you want to believe.
How Do You Eat An Elephant?
The recent passage of the healthcare bill is no victory for the American people and to think otherwise is bordering on insanity. We, the American people, are not so stupid as to believe this healthcare bill as anything to do with us. If it did, the American people would have had been heard when they emphatically shouted "NO! WE DO NOT WANT THIS!!". This healthcare bill serves only to further the Democratic / Progressive agenda. They now have healthcare, student loans, education, banking and the car companies under the government umbrella. Does anyone see the implications here? Do you think this is coincidence? There is an old proverb that is beginning to make sense to me now. The question is “How do you eat and elephant?” The answer is simple: “One bite at a time”. America and what we stand for is being eaten away, one bite at a time.
Under the current bill, it will be illegal to be uninsured. That is fundamentally wrong in and of itself. While government may have jurisdiction to regulate interstate commerce, they cannot mandate that we buy anything. That’s not regulation and if someone chooses not to purchase health insurance, there is no commerce there to regulate. There is nothing in our constitution that states healthcare is a right, first of all, and nowhere in the constitution was the government granted authorization to mandate that anyone must have health insurance. Pelosi and Obama behave as though it’s not already illegal for health insurance companies to cancel your policy if you get sick or to deny coverage for preexisting conditions. Those two issues were settled long before this bill was passed. So I ask you; what did the passage of this bill accomplish other than the allowance for more government control in the personal life of the people? Another question to ask yourself; If this healthcare plan is as good as we are being told it is, then why is it that our own government is exempt from mandatory participation in the plan? Are they not “of the people”? Does that not make you question the bold statements in favor of this bill? Stop and think for a moment. More bureaucracies and more government involvement in the private sector equal bigger government and more government control. In other words, a ruling elite class separated from the rest of us. Obama promises that he will go after the nameless rich fat cats and help spread the wealth and level the playing field. In reality, what he has done has ensured that the American people will be a nation dependent on the government. That was never the intention of our founding fathers.
Furthermore, congress has now begun to define our rights as a people. While constitutionally it is not within their power to define these rights, congress has given themselves the power to do so. Once our rights are defined by others, they can (and will) be able to take those rights at any time. That in itself is something to think about. If you buy into the current mentality that the government is responsible for providing your home, education, job and healthcare, you have given them power over your very existence. The price is far more steep than you may think. Do not forget, the government cannot give you anything without first taking it away because the government itself has nothing to give that its people have not already given. When the state fixes potholes in your road or repaves a highway, do you think the state is giving this at no cost? No, your taxes pay for the maintenance necessary for our roads and public areas. This is why they are able to enact legislation where these things are concerned. Public roads, maintained by the taxpayer money, require legislation to protect the public who uses the roads. Thus car insurance is mandatory. While I may not agree with this, I do see how it came about. However, the difference with car insurance should be obvious. The individual state governments do not attempt to supply the car insurance while effectively blocking all other private insurers from the market by phasing them out all together so that the public only has one option for car insurance. They only state that you must have it in order to drive on public roads. You are still free to choose which company you want and what premiums you are willing to pay etc…again, while I may not agree with it, it is a perfect example of what can happen when a body of government assumes control of a private sector. This leads me to my next point; once the government is in charge of your healthcare, education, job etc…they will then be able to legislate what you can and cannot do and in that vein, rightly so. If you were to start a business or take on a major investment, would you leave your business in the hands of an irresponsible employee and give them the freedom to run things any way they chose? No, you would not. You would hire competent individuals who have knowledge and experience in the kind of business you own. They would, in turn, come up with rules and regulations to ensure that the business ran as efficiently and cost effectively as possible. This is the direction America is heading. All of you who believe that you are entitled to the things we are being promised are in for a rude awakening when all the “free” stuff comes with a huge price tag. The price includes but is not limited to, less money in your pocket through higher taxes and less freedom through legislation of personal choices. You like fast food? Better think twice before you eat something containing anything deemed unhealthy by the FDA or the soon to be appointment government healthcare panel. Fats, trans-fats, sugar, alcohol are all bad for you and if you are among the millions who consume these things regularly, don’t think for a minute that your “free” healthcare won’t be reduced based on your risk factors. Medicare is conducting what they call the PQRI project where they require participating doctors to ask certain questions when patients come in to be seen. The questions are related mostly to lifestyle. Do you smoke? Is the patient obese? Do you drink alcohol and if so how much and how often? Answers to these questions are reported with codes to Medicare. My belief is that once the “study” is complete, benefits will be adjusted accordingly. It’s a way to cut cost by reducing benefits for those who lead “unhealthy” lifestyles while maintaining coverage in a government run plan that is in danger of economic failure. Now, if this is the case with Medicare and that only covers a portion of the populace, what do you think an entire government run healthcare system will be like? That’s a scary thought isn’t it?
For the reasons stated above and many more I haven’t even touched on, I am genuinely saddened by the outcome of the healthcare vote. It has become increasingly apparent that we are no longer a government of the people, by the people or for the people. The people have been ignored.
Under the current bill, it will be illegal to be uninsured. That is fundamentally wrong in and of itself. While government may have jurisdiction to regulate interstate commerce, they cannot mandate that we buy anything. That’s not regulation and if someone chooses not to purchase health insurance, there is no commerce there to regulate. There is nothing in our constitution that states healthcare is a right, first of all, and nowhere in the constitution was the government granted authorization to mandate that anyone must have health insurance. Pelosi and Obama behave as though it’s not already illegal for health insurance companies to cancel your policy if you get sick or to deny coverage for preexisting conditions. Those two issues were settled long before this bill was passed. So I ask you; what did the passage of this bill accomplish other than the allowance for more government control in the personal life of the people? Another question to ask yourself; If this healthcare plan is as good as we are being told it is, then why is it that our own government is exempt from mandatory participation in the plan? Are they not “of the people”? Does that not make you question the bold statements in favor of this bill? Stop and think for a moment. More bureaucracies and more government involvement in the private sector equal bigger government and more government control. In other words, a ruling elite class separated from the rest of us. Obama promises that he will go after the nameless rich fat cats and help spread the wealth and level the playing field. In reality, what he has done has ensured that the American people will be a nation dependent on the government. That was never the intention of our founding fathers.
Furthermore, congress has now begun to define our rights as a people. While constitutionally it is not within their power to define these rights, congress has given themselves the power to do so. Once our rights are defined by others, they can (and will) be able to take those rights at any time. That in itself is something to think about. If you buy into the current mentality that the government is responsible for providing your home, education, job and healthcare, you have given them power over your very existence. The price is far more steep than you may think. Do not forget, the government cannot give you anything without first taking it away because the government itself has nothing to give that its people have not already given. When the state fixes potholes in your road or repaves a highway, do you think the state is giving this at no cost? No, your taxes pay for the maintenance necessary for our roads and public areas. This is why they are able to enact legislation where these things are concerned. Public roads, maintained by the taxpayer money, require legislation to protect the public who uses the roads. Thus car insurance is mandatory. While I may not agree with this, I do see how it came about. However, the difference with car insurance should be obvious. The individual state governments do not attempt to supply the car insurance while effectively blocking all other private insurers from the market by phasing them out all together so that the public only has one option for car insurance. They only state that you must have it in order to drive on public roads. You are still free to choose which company you want and what premiums you are willing to pay etc…again, while I may not agree with it, it is a perfect example of what can happen when a body of government assumes control of a private sector. This leads me to my next point; once the government is in charge of your healthcare, education, job etc…they will then be able to legislate what you can and cannot do and in that vein, rightly so. If you were to start a business or take on a major investment, would you leave your business in the hands of an irresponsible employee and give them the freedom to run things any way they chose? No, you would not. You would hire competent individuals who have knowledge and experience in the kind of business you own. They would, in turn, come up with rules and regulations to ensure that the business ran as efficiently and cost effectively as possible. This is the direction America is heading. All of you who believe that you are entitled to the things we are being promised are in for a rude awakening when all the “free” stuff comes with a huge price tag. The price includes but is not limited to, less money in your pocket through higher taxes and less freedom through legislation of personal choices. You like fast food? Better think twice before you eat something containing anything deemed unhealthy by the FDA or the soon to be appointment government healthcare panel. Fats, trans-fats, sugar, alcohol are all bad for you and if you are among the millions who consume these things regularly, don’t think for a minute that your “free” healthcare won’t be reduced based on your risk factors. Medicare is conducting what they call the PQRI project where they require participating doctors to ask certain questions when patients come in to be seen. The questions are related mostly to lifestyle. Do you smoke? Is the patient obese? Do you drink alcohol and if so how much and how often? Answers to these questions are reported with codes to Medicare. My belief is that once the “study” is complete, benefits will be adjusted accordingly. It’s a way to cut cost by reducing benefits for those who lead “unhealthy” lifestyles while maintaining coverage in a government run plan that is in danger of economic failure. Now, if this is the case with Medicare and that only covers a portion of the populace, what do you think an entire government run healthcare system will be like? That’s a scary thought isn’t it?
For the reasons stated above and many more I haven’t even touched on, I am genuinely saddened by the outcome of the healthcare vote. It has become increasingly apparent that we are no longer a government of the people, by the people or for the people. The people have been ignored.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)