Nothin Up My Sleeve…… Just Glad I Still Have a Shirt!

Did you see that? No, you missed it didn't you? It's all slight of hand. You thought it was about health care and the economy. You didn't see the control factor in his other hand. He's not fixing anything. He knows it. Watch again. No, too slow. You missed it. Oops!! You've lost your freedom. Dumb-ass.

As I watch this slick snake oil salesman, I keep thinking, “are we almost to the part where you say that you won't fall for that again”???

The facts are as such: No Government program has worked as intended and NONE has stayed within the budget guidelines or has even come close.

So, why do we keep falling for their sales spiel? Just like some late-night INTERNET millions ad, you keep buying it!!!

This time they've gone too far. Our elected officials are not even given time to read the bills before they are expected to vote. HOWEVER, “We the People” have started to pay more attention. We have even started reading the bills, rather then taking their word for it.

Now they'd like to make you think it's just Republicans that oppose these bills, namely the Health Care bill and the Stimulus Packages. Not true. There are fiscal conservatives in both parties.

JOE LIEBERMAN: I don't agree. Premiums will go up. When people hear "public option" I think they think it's for free. It's not for free. Somebody's going to have to pay for it, and you can bet it's going to be the taxpayers and the people who pay health insurance premiums now.

It's up to us to take what they promise and compare it with what is in the bill that they write. If it doesn't match up (and it won't), then we need to call them on it.

So, if Democrats (the leadership) aren't trying to fix things, then WHAT???

Here's what they do. They create programs that they control. They get as many people addicted to the programs. This is there real voter base. Once you are hooked, you are not going to vote for the person that wants to end your program.

Obama is taking it one step further by creating the circumstances to hasten your move to dependence. Slavery won't come again as a revolution, it will sneak up on you.

No, there's nothing up my sleeve…. or in my pocket…… or my wallet. Progressive seems to means Negative Progress.

====================================================

Things to Consider About Health Care

Before deciding that socialized medicine is the way to go you should watch this story by John Stossel of ABC

Sick in America, part 1

Socialism does not take into account the Human behavior factor. Our medical system does have problems, True. However, there ARE better solutions.

Health System expert Nina Owcharenko dissects "five major faults with the health care bills" being pushed in the House and Senate.

1. The public "option." Both proposals would create a government-run insurance plan which proponents claim would foster honest competition among private insurers. But how can there be fair competition when one of the players -- Washington -- is both writing the rules and playing the game? What's more, this scheme could lead millions of Americans to lose their private health insurance.

2. Centralized regulation. Both the House and Senate bills would result in sweeping and complex federal regulation of health insurance. This would take oversight away from states and concentrate it in Washington -- and this oversight is best left at the state level.

3. Greater dependency on government. Both bills would expand existing government health care program and introduce massive new taxpayer-funded subsidies to buy health insurance. This would leave millions of Americans dependent on government for their health care.

4. Employer mandate. The plans would force employers to provide coverage for all employees or face a massive tax. These "play-or-pay" mandates will raise prices, stifle economic growth and particularly hurt low-wage earners.

5. Individual mandate. Both bills require that all Americans purchase health insurance. Those without coverage or whose plans don't meet the new federal standards would face tax penalties. Special interests are sure to "lobby intensively to expand the legally mandated health benefits, medical treatments and procedures, and drugs that all Americans must buy under penalty of law."

Taken together or individually, these flaws would inflict serious damage on an industry that represents one-sixth of our nation's economy.

SO, WHAT DO WE DO?

The conservative alternative to socialized medicine is to enact serious reforms in current tax and insurance law that would expand personal ownership and control of health insurance and transfer the control of health care dollars to individuals and families. Reforms that would move our bureaucracy-driven, heavily regulated third-party payment system to a patient-centered system where the consumer chooses and real free-market competition is brought into play.

Competition is a REAL factor in lowering health care cost. One big way to do this would be to allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. Even liberal reporter Wolf Blitzer has brought up this point.

All I'm saying is let's not jump in without weighing the options and considering the possible problems. Once programs are enacted, it is near to impossible to go back.

Think first, then act.

On Liberty and the Exercise there of

On Liberty and the Exercise there of


lib·er·ty
Pronunciation: \ˈli-bər-tē\ Function: noun
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French liberté, from Latin libertat-, libertas, from liber free
Date: 14th century

1: the quality or state of being free: a: the power to do as one pleases
b: freedom from physical restraint
c: freedom from arbitrary or despotic control
d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges
e: the power of choice

2 a: a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant : privilege
b: permission especially to go freely within specified limits


A funny thing happened to me while in debate with several Liberals, separately. Two of them had invoked one of my favorite quotes from Benjamin Franklin,

"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." [a popular variation].

Now, this was ironic on a number of levels. #1 They were using this with the Patriot Act in mind. I happen to think that the Patriot Act was arrived at with too much haste and DID indeed sacrifice too much Liberty. #2 Just the fact that the Leaders THEY have elected have been incrementally turning our government into the "Nanny State" that was predicted by Alexis de Tocqueville.

They always seem to have some brilliant logic to support why they need to take more liberty from you: For the good of the children, To make up for past wrongs, To save the environment. These are all subjects that tug at the heart and provoke an emotional response. Their solution is not always as noble.

The main problem being, Liberalism makes emotional responses, where Conservatism seeks LOGIC. Of course, there are those that have CALLED themselves Republicans, but have made decisions more in line with the Liberal. The Republican Party may have been founded by Conservatives, but few are nowadays. Overall a true Conservative will seek a solution that works over one that SOUNDS good.

“Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism” --- Barry Goldwater

So, Where does the average person fall into this and what policies can be used as example.

Liberalism protected slavery, it justified the actions by making excuses: "They're less than human," just based on skin color and what they considered civilized, therefore treating the slaves in this manner followed along those lines.

In contrast Conservatism lead to the founding of the Republican Party in order to combat the abomination.

Going further back, it was Conservatism that sought to be free from the England, create a government that would be fair, and take the risk of losing their lives in order to promote these ideals. Liberalism didn't want to bother and were happy without the liberty in trade for protection from a strong dictator.

Moving to the modern era, FDR began attacking the structure of the Constitution. He couldn't get the changes he wanted, so he appointed Supreme Court Justices that would rule in his favor on whether something was Constitutional. He was able to circumvent the Checks and Balances that were established by the founders.

He increased the power of the Executive Branch, creating a Central Government that overruled the rights of the states. He also started the major move of creating the dependence of people on the government. Wards of the state. The New Deal created a modern day caste system that is very difficult for people to escape. It sounds compassionate!!!

This strategy has continued to this day. We have programs that once created are impossible to dismantle, even when proven to be detrimental.

We, as a society, are giving up our Liberty for the promise that we'll be taken care of.

A recent poll has shown that 40% of Americans consider themselves to be Conservative, the largest group followed by moderates. I believe that number to be larger if you were to look at the individuals and see how they go about their lives. Most people live in a very conservative manner.

We are shown people that are in need and some of us are swayed by Liberal politicians that promise to take care of everyone. It may be cliché, but the old adage, "Give a man a fish, he eats for a day, but teach a man to fish and he will never starve" is the comparison of Liberal and Conservative methodology.

I won't conclude here which policies that are being proposed today are Liberal, but YOU must take a look beyond what sounds good and decide what will actually work. Promises of Security in exchange for your Liberty.

Brief Statement on the Bailout.

-- For the conservative, Bush was wrong in bailing out Companies as urged by Obama. Obama is expanding the bad policy. GM was/is mostly in trouble due to the overwhelming amount of retired employees that they must continue to support. This is compounded by the rise in oil prices and then even further by the banking crisis that started with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

----When government controls the means of production and the administration there of, then we call this Socialism. Is this a loan or an investment? Usually the guidelines of a loan are put there to insure that the company or individual will have the means to pay it back. Which leads to my next point.

--- GM had 20 units that were making a profit. Of those, 11 were Trucks/SUVs. The "suggestions" from Obama's had none of these units in mind. The suggestions being made would put them further in debt. They already had hybrids and econocars available. You can't force people to buy them.

--- The money is not OURS, it’s being borrowed from the next generation, our children. Fix the problem themselves or file for bankruptcy should have been the only choices

---If they spend the money like Democrats, then they will fail.

Can we be colorblind?

One of the tenets of Conservatism is that policies can only be fair when they are aimed at the individual, not giving weight to one group over the other.

Look at all the different classifications we are grouped into.

My children are the perfect example of our nations "Melting Pot" as it was once called. They are a mixture of their mother's DNA which ranges from African descent to Sioux and Cherokee and mine which is Scottish, Norwegian, German and the like.

On their school applications, under race I checked "other" and wrote in "human."

"Race" is not an accurate label for the divisions within Mankind. We are the human race. If we were truly different races, then we would not be able to inter breed, period. www.onehumanrace.com

What separates us is which direction our ancestors moved as they spread out across the globe and which traits were better suited in that area. That is it.

Now we have a government that We the People need to guide away from classifying people and start writing policy that treats all the same. Aside from "special needs" which we only need to be logical about.

I'm speaking generally of course. If two people are in the same situation with the only difference being skin color, then policy written for said situation cannot favor one over the other. PERIOD.

Just What are We Changing Into

The Democrat Party MAY have traded in their white sheets for a Civil Rights banner, but when your policies exclude people on the basis of skin color, it is discrimination!

If you read pretty much ANY of the policies being put into action by Obama, Pelosi and their ilk, you will find measures that will exclude many based on their skin color and not their NEED.

Now, I don't think most of their policies are necessary to begin with. I feel even more upset when I see that they still want to separate people.

I will be continuing this line of discussion over the next few entries as I continue to read through their latest endeavors.

Alice Walker goes Gaza

Israel gave control of Gaza back to the Palestinians and is now controlled by Hamas, only to have Hamas hide behind civilians while launching rockets into Israel.

Hamas is a group of cowardly murderers. There is NO reason for them to be launching attacks and we don't need groups like Code Pink to highlight anything.

To Alice: Great Book, I enjoyed the Color Purple, but you need to open your eyes. Israel would not launch any attacks on Gaza were it not for Hamas launching on them. The blood is on Hamas.

I'm sure if Hamas started launching rockets into YOUR community, you would want our government to strike back!