The estimable but atheist Allahpundit repeats the question on Obamacare, and appears to believe that it may be a valid question:
"Frankly, I’m surprised the Democrats haven’t pushed more of a moral/religious spin on red-staters to try to weaken support among conservatives who are making Blue Dogs’ lives hell. There are worse sales pitches than reminding evangelicals that universal health care means treatment for 47 million people who currently suffer without."
If he were to poll the leaders of some churches, he would probably get a positive response. The Episcopals, for example, are solidly on board, though some continue to question whether the TEC remains a Christian group in any sense of the word, other than the fact that they continue to use Christian vocabulary to describe their heresies.
Methodist, hard to say but likely. Presbyterians, likewise. Catholics have almost made social justice one of the sacraments (/sarc), so I'm guessing yes. Someday the Catholics might wake up and realize that those who would demand their support for socialized medicine are the same people who would demand abortion on demand from Catholic hospitals, gay marriage, and the destruction of their faith.
But Allah's question may stem from his lack of experience with Christian values. It's obvious from his writing that he has a decent grasp of Christian "dogmas" but he seems to have little understanding of issues like responsibility and consequences. After all, Paul wrote to the Thessalonian church straight and straight up said, "If a man won't work, neither shall he eat." His assessment of the people of Crete was similar if not more descriptive: "Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons." This testimony is true..."
Incidentally, this is not an argument against Christian charity, but rather an argument against parasitism. The Bible, Old and New Testament, always requires that believers assist those who cannot help themselves: widows, orphans, people on whom catastrophe has fallen. But Christ never proposed supporting a permanent victim class.
He was always ready to forgive and restore, if the recipient of the forgiveness and restoration repented. In the parable of the Prodigal, the father didn't find the son and continue to transfer money to his bank account so the son could continue to waste it on whores and riotous living. Christ told the woman taken in adultery that He did not condemn her, but it was time to cut that adultery thing out. And it seems likely that He would say to the permanently unemployed "Get a job."
WWJD? Be responsible. That just might mean stop blaming others for your stupidity.
Just saying.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Is the Public Health Care Option Dead?
Senator Conrad (D-ND) says it is. Secretary Sebelius says it's not an essential element for Obamacare.
Conrad we can trust, probably. Sebilius, not so much. But it looks like we are moving into the face-saving phase of Obamacare, wherein Obama takes what he can get and proclaims himself the winner, except the Leftists will scream and the Right will spew liquids through their nostils in derision. The question is whether Obama can walk it back without Jim Demint blasting "Waterloo" over the Senate sound system. Obama will certainly try, and the media will undoubtedly help him.
No one will want Gibbs job, that's for sure. Another win for Sarah Palin? I vote yes.
The real issue now is what smaller damages the Dems can do to health care... I mean, what measures they can craft to try to save something from this debacle. It's questionable whether they can salvage enough to save 50 seats in the House, and who knows how many Senate seats.
Are there acceptable compromises?
1. Remove restrictions on selling health insurance across state lines. Figure this one out: the federal government can use the Interstate Commerce clause to fight hate crimes, which was NOT the purpose of the Interstate Commerce clause, but they won't open up a normal economic transaction like the sale of insurance, which WAS the purpose of the Interstate Commerce clause. (And no, I don't think crime is a good thing. I just think we need to prostitute the Constitution to achieve some social goal. And why isn't a crime just a crime?)
2. Something needs to be done about preexisting conditions. A family has insurance, someone changes jobs, and neither the old or new insurance companies have to pay for medical treatment for serious illnesses. If a person paid for insurance with their old job, they need to be covered for catastrophic illnesses. No, I don't know how it should be worked out, I just know that it should be worked out.
3. Restrictions on medical lawsuits. Lawyers should not be able to treat medical care like Vegas. Get the right case, get the right jury, and get rich. If you want proof that this is a bad system, I give you John Edwards. (While we are on this subject, why should any aspect of our national life be subject to throw of the judicial dice? Legal representation should not be a crap shoot wherein a lawyer can gamble on your claim to get rich. I read that the ACLU is basically self-funding via lawsuits. Is that correct?)
What about co-ops? The idea is that the federal government can manage insurance for people who aren't doing it themselves. If this is bad on a large scale, doing it on a small scale does not suddenly infuse it with wisdom and virtue. It's just another dumb socialist idea. Co-ops looks like another wedge in the system, similar to SCHIP. As long as we agree that the government is responsible for some part of health care, they can take over the whole thing, assuming that they have the votes. We need to make it
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
Conrad we can trust, probably. Sebilius, not so much. But it looks like we are moving into the face-saving phase of Obamacare, wherein Obama takes what he can get and proclaims himself the winner, except the Leftists will scream and the Right will spew liquids through their nostils in derision. The question is whether Obama can walk it back without Jim Demint blasting "Waterloo" over the Senate sound system. Obama will certainly try, and the media will undoubtedly help him.
No one will want Gibbs job, that's for sure. Another win for Sarah Palin? I vote yes.
The real issue now is what smaller damages the Dems can do to health care... I mean, what measures they can craft to try to save something from this debacle. It's questionable whether they can salvage enough to save 50 seats in the House, and who knows how many Senate seats.
Are there acceptable compromises?
1. Remove restrictions on selling health insurance across state lines. Figure this one out: the federal government can use the Interstate Commerce clause to fight hate crimes, which was NOT the purpose of the Interstate Commerce clause, but they won't open up a normal economic transaction like the sale of insurance, which WAS the purpose of the Interstate Commerce clause. (And no, I don't think crime is a good thing. I just think we need to prostitute the Constitution to achieve some social goal. And why isn't a crime just a crime?)
2. Something needs to be done about preexisting conditions. A family has insurance, someone changes jobs, and neither the old or new insurance companies have to pay for medical treatment for serious illnesses. If a person paid for insurance with their old job, they need to be covered for catastrophic illnesses. No, I don't know how it should be worked out, I just know that it should be worked out.
3. Restrictions on medical lawsuits. Lawyers should not be able to treat medical care like Vegas. Get the right case, get the right jury, and get rich. If you want proof that this is a bad system, I give you John Edwards. (While we are on this subject, why should any aspect of our national life be subject to throw of the judicial dice? Legal representation should not be a crap shoot wherein a lawyer can gamble on your claim to get rich. I read that the ACLU is basically self-funding via lawsuits. Is that correct?)
What about co-ops? The idea is that the federal government can manage insurance for people who aren't doing it themselves. If this is bad on a large scale, doing it on a small scale does not suddenly infuse it with wisdom and virtue. It's just another dumb socialist idea. Co-ops looks like another wedge in the system, similar to SCHIP. As long as we agree that the government is responsible for some part of health care, they can take over the whole thing, assuming that they have the votes. We need to make it
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
Friday, August 14, 2009
Senator Lincoln, is Obamacare a good idea or not?
“The problem of doing both of them together is that it becomes too big of a lift,” Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas said in an interview last week. “I see the cap-and-trade being a real problem.”
So apparently Obamacare is not the problem, it's Cap-and-Trade. Except it looks like Cap-and-Trade is not a problem, either. It's the combination of the two that gets attention and makes it hard to pass both of them. So if we dump Cap-and-Trade for the moment, you can support Obamacare? Did I get that right? The people of Arkansas would like to know.
So apparently Obamacare is not the problem, it's Cap-and-Trade. Except it looks like Cap-and-Trade is not a problem, either. It's the combination of the two that gets attention and makes it hard to pass both of them. So if we dump Cap-and-Trade for the moment, you can support Obamacare? Did I get that right? The people of Arkansas would like to know.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Woman is the Nigger of the World
We insult her everyday on TV
And wonder why she has
no guts or confidence
When she's young we kill
her will to be free
While telling her not to
be so smart we put her down
for being so dumb
Woman is the nigger of the world...yes she is
©John Lennon, 1972
Yeah, I put it out there. The “N” word. Of course, John Lennon could say it because he was acceptably liberal, atheist, and English, and I am not.
The latest woman to be demonized by Democrats is Michelle Bachman. Hillary Clinton, destroyed because she dared to run against Obama. Sarah Palin, because she is a conservative. And attractive. And she kept that mongoloid whelp who isn't even issue from her loins. And she ran against Obama. And now, Michelle Bachmann. She dared to oppose to the socialism of Obama and because Sarah Palin spoke favorably of her. And she objected to the radical environmental policy. And she dared question putting the ACORN in charge of the census.
But it matters not. Bachmann is an attractive Republican woman, and therefore, only deserving of attack from Democrats. Face it. The woman has wandered far from the Democrat Plantation for Women®.
Politico documents the attacks. “Ugly individual” by the Daily Kos. “Bizarre news story of the month every month” by DFL leader. “Just nuts” and “utter embarrassment" from another DFL member. “Further to the right than Attila the Hun" from still another Democrat.
The reason? "She is so principally and diametrically opposed to the core principles that we have," Donald McFarland, a Minnesota-based Democratic strategist, said of Bachmann.
And there you have it: gender traitor. Support for the Democrat agenda trumps everything. Nancy Pelosi’s bizarre pronouncement that Republicans are showing up at town hall meetings with swastikas and a Nazi agenda is perfectly acceptable because she is a Democrat. Barbara Boxer’s talk of well-dressed protesters in Florida ordering her back to California is accepted as truth, because she is a Democrat. Statements that may indicate the IQ of a bent nail matters not to Democrats. No, it’s only if you are a Republican woman that liberals will attack with the viciousness of a killer whale chasing a penguin.
Bachmann is from liberal Minnesota, which Democrats believe makes her vulnerable. Any attack is acceptable if there is a chance to destroy a conservative woman. (She is likely safe. McCain carried her district in liberal Minnesota by eight points.)
Only race traitor blacks can be Republican. Hispanics who work for Fox News are sellouts. And conservative women are worthy of destruction.
Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
Monday, July 27, 2009
Shocking News: Romney Consultant doesn't like Palin!
In fact, the consultant, Alex Castellanos, doesn't like Huckabee, either. Palin and Huckabee are two conservatives who just can't win.
“We’re going to have a division in the Right in the Republican Party,” Castellanos told CNN Chief National Correspondent John King, “We now have two Mike Huckabees – people who have a powerful force in the party but can’t get out of the party in a general election and win.”
Apparently what conservatives need are more squishy Romney types, people whose political colors change with their ambitions. Governor of USSR-MASS? Legal abortion, a state health care plan that collapses soon after he leaves office. Presidential candidate? Abortion is bad, but dang, didn't I do good on that health care thing? Federalism is all about socialism at the state level. Obama opponent? Socialized medicine is very, very bad.
Castellanos, bud? Huck got more delegates than Romney, and paid a lot less, like a whole lot less, for each one than Romney did.
Here is a test, folks. Who would get a warmer welcome at a Tea Party gathering:
Palin
Huckabee
Romney
Yup, that's what I thought.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
How We Financed Obama’s 2012 Campaign
And the Democrats 2010 campaign
How we are financing our own destruction with tax dollars.
Obama raised or spent over $600 million dollars to win in 2008. Chump change
He and the Democrats just multiplied that number by a thousand, or actually closer to twelve hundred times, that 1,200 times. Or rather, you and I just multiplied that number by twelve times as much money. The stimulus bill of $787 billion ($787,000.000) is being used by Democrats to buy votes for the next two elections. Technically speaking, it ain’t tax money, since the deficit (the difference between the amount of taxes collected and the amount of money spent) is going to go way past $787 trillion dollars.
The stimulus is not being used to stimulate the economy by creating jobs. And while I said that it is being spent to finance the next elections, that is only true by extension. A lot of it is being used to reward Obama supporters in preparation for next year’s election, as well as 2012. $800,000 to Kevin Johnson, mayor of Sacramento and founder of St. Hope, Obama supporter and hoops partner. $40,000 to the law firm of Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter. Things like that.
The Federal Reserve got in on the act, too. Bernanke has spent between one and three TRILLION dollars to purchase bad debts. It’s hard to tell just how big the Fed’s contribution to the Obama New World Vision is. They can legally hide just about anything they want to hide.
The Fed doesn’t get tax money, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be paying for it. The Fed has two choices, as far as I can determine. The first is to sit on the bad debts and try to whittle them down so slowly that it won’t really affect the economy. Think of it as moving the bad numbers to a spread sheet that stockholders, and Americans, can’t see. If they can sit on the numbers for ten or twenty years, they can gradually reduce it to zero.
The more likely scenario is that the situation is out of control, and the Fed just created double digit inflation. You don’t have to take my word for it. Such are the fears of our greatest lender: China. The worsening economy makes this scenario much more likely. After all, even paper money has limits.
How we are financing our own destruction with tax dollars.
Obama raised or spent over $600 million dollars to win in 2008. Chump change
He and the Democrats just multiplied that number by a thousand, or actually closer to twelve hundred times, that 1,200 times. Or rather, you and I just multiplied that number by twelve times as much money. The stimulus bill of $787 billion ($787,000.000) is being used by Democrats to buy votes for the next two elections. Technically speaking, it ain’t tax money, since the deficit (the difference between the amount of taxes collected and the amount of money spent) is going to go way past $787 trillion dollars.
The stimulus is not being used to stimulate the economy by creating jobs. And while I said that it is being spent to finance the next elections, that is only true by extension. A lot of it is being used to reward Obama supporters in preparation for next year’s election, as well as 2012. $800,000 to Kevin Johnson, mayor of Sacramento and founder of St. Hope, Obama supporter and hoops partner. $40,000 to the law firm of Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter. Things like that.
The Federal Reserve got in on the act, too. Bernanke has spent between one and three TRILLION dollars to purchase bad debts. It’s hard to tell just how big the Fed’s contribution to the Obama New World Vision is. They can legally hide just about anything they want to hide.
The Fed doesn’t get tax money, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be paying for it. The Fed has two choices, as far as I can determine. The first is to sit on the bad debts and try to whittle them down so slowly that it won’t really affect the economy. Think of it as moving the bad numbers to a spread sheet that stockholders, and Americans, can’t see. If they can sit on the numbers for ten or twenty years, they can gradually reduce it to zero.
The more likely scenario is that the situation is out of control, and the Fed just created double digit inflation. You don’t have to take my word for it. Such are the fears of our greatest lender: China. The worsening economy makes this scenario much more likely. After all, even paper money has limits.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Subsidizing our own destruction
The following statement is completely unnecessary:
The mass media, particularly television, is the most important factor in creating public opinion.
The following statement is also unnecessary:
The media has an agenda that is not shared by the majority of us.
So we ignore the media and everything is fine, right? Not so. We subsidize Keith Obermann’s nightly rant even if we do not watch him. And Katie Couric. And Charles Gibson. And Brian Williams' bow to Obama. And Chris Matthews.
Allow me conduct the following unnecessary analysis.
Obermann is an employee of NBC, and is a feature on MSNBC. I don’t watch MSNBC, but I used to watch Life, before NBC decided to drop the show (which either tells you something about me or NBC. Take your pick.).
Life was carried by the local NBC affiliate, which paid NBC a fee for running the show.
They in turn sold advertising on Life to raise money to both stay on the air and to pay NBC for the show, which was also used to pay for the Obermann rants, the Couric rants, the Gibson rants and provide Brian Williams with a paycheck so he can bow to Obama (does this bring us full circle from Obermann to Obama?).
The grocery chain that I shop at buys advertising, which went to NBC to pay for the show. And some for Keith Obermann, Katie Couric, Charles Gibson, and Brian Williams, who bows to Obama (who swallowed the dog to catch the cat that chased the mouse that caught the spider that wiggled and jiggled and tickled insider her…).
None of this should be a surprise to you. I also shop at Lowes, Home Depot, Lowes, I buy gasoline that is probably advertised on NBC, and so on.
I am responsible for Obermann’s rants. I probably am the worst person on earth. Except for you, if you watch The Office, Heros, the Biggest Loser, Saturday Night Live, The Tonight Show, America’s Got Talent, Law and Order, and on an on. That makes you a worse person than I am, since I don’t watch those shows.
Why do we do it? Will there be one opinion expressed on any NBC show that is helpful to us? Not just “No” but …
NBC, and ABC and CBS, are determined to destroy conservatives. They ridicule conservative Christianity. They ridicule gun ownership. And they run a continuous propaganda campaign against both Republican and conservative politicians. They decided to destroy Palin, and are still trying. They run non-stop coverage of every scandal involving a Republican or conservative, but you will never hear of a scandal against a Democrat. Lying by omission, as it were.
Why do I continue to do business with the companies that fund the attacks on me? Why do you? If there is one thing that should be obvious, the power of the consumer is huge. Even the cretin Letterman was forced into a half apology by a rather small boycott of advertiser (and of course, we let him get away with it.)
Tea Party, if you want to make a difference, start a public boycott of the companies that advertise on NBC, and then let’s move on to ABC and CBS. If our local affiliate lost 50% of their advertising for one month, they would be hurting badly. If we multiply that almost 200, the number of NBC affiliates, NBC is in deep trouble.
Okay, we won’t get all 200. Closing down half the affiliates will probably destroy NBC. Then CBS. Then ABC.
It’s our money, and it’s our nation, and it’our lives. It’s time we used it.
SHUT THEM DOWN!
The mass media, particularly television, is the most important factor in creating public opinion.
The following statement is also unnecessary:
The media has an agenda that is not shared by the majority of us.
So we ignore the media and everything is fine, right? Not so. We subsidize Keith Obermann’s nightly rant even if we do not watch him. And Katie Couric. And Charles Gibson. And Brian Williams' bow to Obama. And Chris Matthews.
Allow me conduct the following unnecessary analysis.
Obermann is an employee of NBC, and is a feature on MSNBC. I don’t watch MSNBC, but I used to watch Life, before NBC decided to drop the show (which either tells you something about me or NBC. Take your pick.).
Life was carried by the local NBC affiliate, which paid NBC a fee for running the show.
They in turn sold advertising on Life to raise money to both stay on the air and to pay NBC for the show, which was also used to pay for the Obermann rants, the Couric rants, the Gibson rants and provide Brian Williams with a paycheck so he can bow to Obama (does this bring us full circle from Obermann to Obama?).
The grocery chain that I shop at buys advertising, which went to NBC to pay for the show. And some for Keith Obermann, Katie Couric, Charles Gibson, and Brian Williams, who bows to Obama (who swallowed the dog to catch the cat that chased the mouse that caught the spider that wiggled and jiggled and tickled insider her…).
None of this should be a surprise to you. I also shop at Lowes, Home Depot, Lowes, I buy gasoline that is probably advertised on NBC, and so on.
I am responsible for Obermann’s rants. I probably am the worst person on earth. Except for you, if you watch The Office, Heros, the Biggest Loser, Saturday Night Live, The Tonight Show, America’s Got Talent, Law and Order, and on an on. That makes you a worse person than I am, since I don’t watch those shows.
Why do we do it? Will there be one opinion expressed on any NBC show that is helpful to us? Not just “No” but …
NBC, and ABC and CBS, are determined to destroy conservatives. They ridicule conservative Christianity. They ridicule gun ownership. And they run a continuous propaganda campaign against both Republican and conservative politicians. They decided to destroy Palin, and are still trying. They run non-stop coverage of every scandal involving a Republican or conservative, but you will never hear of a scandal against a Democrat. Lying by omission, as it were.
Why do I continue to do business with the companies that fund the attacks on me? Why do you? If there is one thing that should be obvious, the power of the consumer is huge. Even the cretin Letterman was forced into a half apology by a rather small boycott of advertiser (and of course, we let him get away with it.)
Tea Party, if you want to make a difference, start a public boycott of the companies that advertise on NBC, and then let’s move on to ABC and CBS. If our local affiliate lost 50% of their advertising for one month, they would be hurting badly. If we multiply that almost 200, the number of NBC affiliates, NBC is in deep trouble.
Okay, we won’t get all 200. Closing down half the affiliates will probably destroy NBC. Then CBS. Then ABC.
It’s our money, and it’s our nation, and it’our lives. It’s time we used it.
SHUT THEM DOWN!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)