IF HEALTH INSURANCE WERE like car insurance, I would be responsible for obtaining it as opposed to having my employer supply it for me. After all, it's my body and my healthwhy do I expect someone else to be responsible for it?
If health insurance were like car insurance, I would be able to shop around for the cheapest insurance with competitive rates from multiple vendors to find a plan best suited for my lifestyle. If health insurance were like car insurance, I would not be denied insurance unless I demonstrated repeatedly offensive and ill-advised behavior.
On the other hand, what if my car insurance were like my health insurance? My employer would be required to obtain my car insurance, which means I couldn't drive if I didn't have a job. Everyone would pay the same for auto insurance regardless of driving history. The system would breed lack of accountability since there would be no incentives for good driving behavior and no repercussions for accidents or speeding. Sure it would be economical for the irresponsible driver, but only at an exorbitant cost to the safe driver and society as a whole.
There is an urgent need for major overhaul of the health care system in the United States. While the debated health care reform bill addresses some issues that warrant change, it continues to penalize the delivery of care by cutting reimbursements without providing incentives for healthy lifestyles and quality of care.
The argument above was snipped from a thought-provoking piece by American Thinker contributor, Jon George MD. Uniquely unserviceable, the entire hypothesis of personal healthcare is stigmatized by tall tales, bald-faced lies, limp-wristed half-truths, rotten damned statistics, dubiously forgotten if not forbidden habits, twice wilted violets, luridly gilded stopwatches and post-convoluted twists of fate far too frankly philistine to be repaired in its current state.
And thus needs to be scrapped. The facts are these: there is the concept of literate self-reliance, bound by cold capitalist principle, personally tempered by an odd and multitiered assortment of fancy humane considerations. Then there is somebody else trying to oblige you your very existence. The whole "healthcare" argument is really about government control of populations. When I vote, I'll vote to keep my freedom as reckoned against belonging to the giant government-controlled family.
So in that spirit, I highly recommend the whole article, if only in the context of the rich reader commentary which follows it. The intelligent reader will quickly comprehend the bottom line is one's own and is ALWAYS the endgame, no matter how consistent or inconsistent the rules of play.
Don't be an accident statistic. Obey that nerve which commands choice and resolve.
WE OFTEN REFLECT ON THE FACT that our children will never know the fearlessness and sense of safety with which we grew up. Our country was a safe place, and we were taught in school that we were the most blessed nation and best nation on earth. Oh sure, we survived cars without seat belts and bikes without helmets and even the flu without flu shots. Now we have to worry about the government keeping us safe from ourselves by regulating our garden and our farm animals, closing down our area's artesian wells... and yet we have to stand by if a wolf comes in our yard to kill our dog. I'm not sure whom this government is looking out for.
REAL ESTATE. ANOTHER SPLENDID EXAMPLE OF THE NOW not so misty ‘global conspiracy picture’ gaining clarity with a few more brush strokes of reality. This is just another facet of, and a continuation of the top down intentional pitting of the prudent against the not so prudent for control and elimination. This ballsy fact of a clockwork tenacity pushing for irresponsible financial activity goes well beyond instilling deflective jealousy and is more focused on creating anger and hate as strategic debt defaulting continues to rise thanks to the stranglehold the banks have on the economy.
And they've learned not a shred of hope is coming from DC or anywhere else...
This push is an integral part of the larger global divide and conquer scheme whereby the rich eliminate the high resource consuming, expensive to maintain, and always threatening middle class, and replace it with a low cost, non threatening, low brow, law enforcement class with the ultimate goal being a two tier ruler and ruled world. It's the warm and wonderful industrious Germans against those lazy shiftless Greeks. It is Pernicious Greed replacing good old fashioned Vanilla Greed. It's the same brutal squag in a different suit!
Now we understand that the grit of life is politics. The backlash will be strengthened and hastened by having ready a fair alternative to the end of all of this socially destructive parasitic voodoo whereby economics is falsely and deceptively separated from politicsnamelya very transparent, INTEREST FREE, alternative utility banking system that is controlled by the people.
Come on kidsit is time to pump up the volume of resistance while you still have a few resources remaining! It is time for election boycotts! Deception is the strongest political force on the planet.
A sad reckoning, but then Diogenes contributed his own two cents, adding to the profound real estate bust many of us are feeling:
I live in Phoenix. I know many people who can pay, but are preparing to walk. While Case-Shiller indicates that Phoenix is down 55% from the peak, I can tell you that, in many areas, it is much more than this. Case in point: a Scottsdale friend that bought a $950k house to live in, with a healthy down payment, now worth $350k.
At a recent dinner party, this was all everyone discussed. Lots of people are buying new cars, some are buying new townhouses or small homes, and others renting apartments while their credit is good, in anticipation of defaulting. Perhaps this was why consumer spending jumped a month or so ago? Most of these poeple put 20% or more down, but are profoundly under water, and may not see a recovery in their lifetime. And they see not a shred of hope coming from DC or anywhere else…
You say you want a revolution Well, you know We all want to change the world You tell me that it's evolution Well, you know We all want to change the world But when you talk about destruction Don't you know that you can count me out? John Lennon
"Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life." David Saul Alinksy
The function of socialism is to raise suffering to a higher level. Norman Mailer
IT'S A WONDERFUL DAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, but don't ask me about the details. That would take too much time away from the problems still at hand. Here's what we have in minda nice slice if argumentative heaven, as one rugged individualist to another. As some might say, "There, but for the grace of God, go I..."
Q: But aren't Anarchists just socialists?
A: In a greater sense, yes. Anarchists like Benjamin Tucker and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon were both Anarchists and socialists. Today, however, when one hears another refer to himself as a “socialist,” what the other person usually means is, “state-socialist.”
Though the difference seems to be lost in translation between Anarchists, socialists, and outsiders, it remains an important one to distinguish. As Ernest Lesigne, a French Anarchist of the 19th century, put it, "There are two Socialisms" and we here at the Project Scenewash have got both their numbers"
One is communistic, the other solidaritarian.
One is dictatorial, the other libertarian.
One is metaphysical, the other positive.
One is dogmatic, the other scientific.
One is emotional, the other reflective.
One is destructive, the other constructive.
Both are in pursuit of the greatest possible welfare for all.
One aims to establish happiness for all, the other to enable each to be happy in his own way.
The first regards the State as a society sui generis, of an especial essence, the product of a sort of divine right outside of and above all society, with special rights and able to exact special obediences; the second considers the State as an association like any other, generally managed worse than others.
The first proclaims the sovereignty of the State, the second recognizes no sort of sovereign.
One wishes all monopolies to be held by the State; the other wishes the abolition of all monopolies.
One wishes the governed class to become the governing class; the other wishes the disappearance of classes.
Both declare that the existing state of things cannot last.
The first considers revolutions as the indispensable agent of evolutions; the second teaches that repression alone turns evolutions into revolution.
The first has faith in a cataclysm. The second knows that social progress will result from the free play of individual efforts.
Both understand that we are entering upon a new historic phase.
One wishes that there should be none but proletaires. The other wishes that there should be no more proletaires.
The first wishes to take everything away from everybody. The second wishes to leave each in possession of its own.
The one wishes to expropriate everybody. The other wishes everybody to be a proprietor.
The first says: ‘Do as the government wishes.’ The second says: ‘Do as you wish yourself.’
The former threatens with despotism. The latter promises liberty.
The former makes the citizen the subject of the State. The latter makes the State the employee of the citizen.
One proclaims that labor pains will be necessary to the birth of a new world. The other declares that real progress will not cause suffering to any one.
The first has confidence in social war. The other believes only in the works of peace.
One aspires to command, to regulate, to legislate. The other wishes to attain the minimum of command, of regulation, of legislation.
One would be followed by the most atrocious of reactions. The other opens unlimited horizons to progress.
The first will fail; the other will succeed.
Both desire equality. One by lowering heads that are too high. The other by raising heads that are too low.
One sees equality under a common yoke. The other will secure equality in complete liberty.
One is intolerant, the other tolerant.
One frightens, the other reassures.
The first wishes to instruct everybody. The second wishes to enable everybody to instruct himself.
The first wishes to support everybody. The second wishes to enable everybody to support himself.
One says: The land to the State. The mine to the State. The tool to the State. The product to the State. The other says: The land to the cultivator. The mine to the miner. The tool to the laborer. The product to the producer.
There are only these two Socialisms. One is the infancy of Socialism; the other is its manhood.
One is already the past; the other is the future.
One will give place to the other.
I would add another socialism to this dichotomy, in a sense much more pernicious than either of the first two when strapped against the winds of reality swirling through the early 21st century. The third socialism is that which mouths the idealism of the future, yet remains steadfast in its error.
BUT HEY WAIT, there's more, this Cass Sunstein fellow says that Americans are too racist FOR SOCIALISM. And he defends communism and the welfare state but says that this nation's 'white majority' opposes programs aiding blacks and Hispanics. What about all those obese out of work white folks still clinging to guns and religion? Guess they don't even figure into the race-baiters wealth redistribution strategies. Methinks, of course, we need a new deck. That race card is so frayed, we can see it coming, and it's ALWAYS coming, from the bottom of the deck, from the top of the deck, from somebody's cuff-linked sleeve, yes, it's always coming from somewhere, no matter how skewered the results...
Socialism? This despite the fact that nearly every former socialist nation, including those in western Europe, are warning the US that socialism isn't all it's cracked up to be, as even they are moving away from the organizing system that suffers from too much rampant idealism and not enough bootstrap periphery.
In "The Second Bill of Rights," WND reported, the self-professed communist Obama aide Cass Sunstein proposed a new "bill of rights" in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state. Among his mandates:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
The Obama czar's controversial comments were made in his 2004 book "The Second Bill of Rights," which was obtained and reviewed by WND. On one page in his book, Sunstein claims he is "not seriously arguing" his bill of rights be "encompassed by anything in the Constitution," but on the next page he states that "if the nation becomes committed to certain rights, they may migrate into the Constitution itself."
Later in the book, Sunstein argues that "at a minimum, the second bill should be seen as part and parcel of America's constitutive commitments." WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.
Sunstein has been a main participant in the movement, which openly seeks to create a "progressive" consensus as to what the U.S. Constitution should provide for by the year 2020. It also suggests strategy for how liberal lawyers and judges might bring such a constitutional regime into being.
Just before his appearance at the conference, Sunstein wrote a blog entry in which he explained he "will be urging that it is important to resist, on democratic grounds, the idea that the document should be interpreted to reflect the view of the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party."
That's rich. Notice how Sunstein in his first amendment says that everyone should have the right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation. He didn't mention that everyone has the "right" to a publishing contract, or a paying gig in the arts, a cush talking head job, or a gravy train in politics.
Rather, he intends his own brand of segregation touting a system that demands that everyone participate in this new slavery, the new feudalism, enunciated and controlled by the prestigious oligarchy of beautiful and bright, hand-picked elites who know to toe the party line, and are amply rewarded with entry into the gated communities of government from on high.
Notice also, the usage of the word "decent" when describing certain guarantees this new world order claims to represent. Who gets to decide what is decent or just shy of Shantyville? Who tells me that what I choose to attain or acquire or inherit is too extravagant, and what in all this decision-making is based on criteria other than the equalitarian limits of the open marketplace? We've all seen this movie before. From the September 29 issue of New York Times, itself a bastion of liberal pretentions:
"Even in the midst of one of the greatest challenges to capitalism in 75 years, involving a breakdown of the financial system due to “irrational exuberance,” greed and the weakness of regulatory systems, European Socialist parties and their left-wing cousins have not found a compelling response, let alone taken advantage of the right’s failures.
German voters clobbered the Social Democratic Party on Sunday, giving it only 23 percent of the vote, its worst performance since World War II. Voters also punished left-leaning candidates in the summer’s European Parliament elections and trounced French Socialists in 2007. Where the left holds power, as in Spain and Britain, it is under attack. Where it is out, as in France, Italy and now Germany, it is divided and listless."
No matter what methodologies these aggressive statists intend to use in cutting the materialistic pie, we are told that we will be guaranteed decent jobs, decent health care, decent wages, decent lives. Meanwhile why are these cut-throat millionaires doing all the talking, doing the deciding for us? As constitutional Americans we are already guaranteed an equal opportunity to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, within the realms of moral responsibility. We are not guaranteed a bowl of soup, a box of rocks, a diamond ring, or a job, but we are at liberty to pursue any and all of these things.
But a totalitarian statism is like a skin disease which encompasses all and threatens to spread to every organ in the body, and I respond with a deliberately loud and progressiveNO THANK YOU!
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” Norman Thomas, Socialist
As for me, I would rather fail completely while chasing a dream, embrace my aching inner hobo, and take my God-given liberty to my grave than to play with the scorching fires of committed communism. The founding fathers knew what they were talking about as they studied man's history in dealing with other men. We were warned. And now, perhaps, the greatest threat to America as a freedom-seeking nation since the Civil War is upon us.
That peculiar stealth threat is already upon our shores. While Mister Obamasigns away our rights of freedom of speech to the OIC-dominated United Nations, we must ponder how quickly and where the enemy may pounce next.
The following article by Joseph Farah will display what is at work here. The utter ruin of American competitiveness. That's the blueprint these Marxist Democratic party apparatchiks are using to shore up power for themselves and render the United States more pliable for the big takeover they have already begun executing. Paranoia or keen insight? You be the judge now, or history will do it for you.
IOW IRONIC IS IT THAT the U.S. is embracing socialism at the very moment Europe and many other parts of the world are running away from it? Somebody needs to ask Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi about this.
In the past five years, 33 countries, including 20 in socialist Europe, always held up as the example for a new American economic model by Democrats, have cut their personal income taxes, according to a study by KPMG, the giant accounting firm. In the past four years, 60 countries have cut their corporate income tax rates. Why have they done it?
Simple. They want to compete more effectively for capital and human resources. Basically, the world has been turned upside-downwith territories even under Communist control recognizing that low taxes is what drives burgeoning economies.
SHOT AT THE DNC in Denver this week. It looked like these 9/11 Conspiracy wolves were ready to tear Michelle Malkin from limb to limb. This whole episode reminded me of the 1960s civil rights confrontations, and as I sense it we will see more of this behavior writ large. You know, wolves will be wolves, and bullies will be bullies, no matter what the conflict...
I mean, what do people like this lead bully expect to accomplish? That Malkin would suddenly be addressed by a shaft of light, fall to her knees, tearfully repent of whatever opinions she may have held, and convert to this wolf's version of cocksure dogma? Makes for engaging TV, I suppose, is the fragile logic working here.
These sorts of bullies stalk their prey, unfortunately from both sides of the divide. As the song says, "This is not America."
An excerpt from my poem "Died In My Mouth" by an earlier me, circa 1980. I was then 25, a budding poet, and a fearless hunter standing among the breeze-swept reeds of Corpus Christi. My, how times have changed. I am no longer fearless.
And the saint thus Spoke scantily to the prophet: "He who demoralizes another "Can claim no morality for himself." To this the prophet said nothing, but He knew in part the saint For a shanty fool.
(And the unfed, Left to perish among The unwelcome, left to ravish The beauty of beast, and the beast Of beauty, established Many fine logics.)
I fell blank at such a formula— Asses built on caged numbers observed, Deserved and dirty word reserved For quaint molecules and family, Where my occupation is a gift to anyone Stroking along fishy fables, Mentality tables, cradled Images, daisies, nightsies, Keepsies.
I am the yellow sheep I can’t earn my keep Proving the fallibility of this text World without maps World without worldliness Matterhorn
My mind, an accurate page. My head keeps to its own symbol, There is no comfort.
I wonder what proof died in my mouth.
Of course, a well-fed fellow, whom I think makes his living on the micophone shocking fans and foes alike under the name and out of the mouth of Alex Jones, suddenly appears to protect the mousey but outspoken Ms. Malkin. The crowd begins to stir in a different direction, and everyone with a pair in that crowd seemed to sense, jerks on either side could quickly become the mob...