The Cuban System?!

Ok, this has been going around for a little while now, and I didn’t touch on it because, well frankly, this is just a whole new level of absurdity that I didn’t believe would gather this much steam. Am I really hearing our government representatives advocating for a communist health care system? What more proof do people need besides Ezekiel Emanuel, which I’ll touch on a bit later, that the democrats intend to turn this country into a socialist takeover of every aspect of the private sector? Now, I dare anyone to come on here and try to tell me that Floridians are fleeing to the ocean in search of Cuban health care under Fidel Castro. That argument is so absurd, it begs a Barney Frank. Think about what it says about our supposedly democratic representatives if this is the sort of system they are advocating for. Guys don’t think that it can’t happen here. If it could happen in every other “free” state in the world, it definitely can happen here. All it takes is a citizen base that doesn’t pay attention to what’s happening around them, and a federal government that can re-interpret the constitution so that they dictate what freedoms you should be allowed to have and not have. They are already trying to do so with the second amendment.




The fact of the matter is democrats cannot deny these myths of health care reform when the health care advisor is out saying that the Hippocratic Oath is the problem with our health care system. They can’t say that there are no “death panels” when Ezekiel Emanuel is saying that true health care reform can’t exist unless doctors are forced to deny treatment to the sick for the greater good of society and government finances.



The only logical conclusion I can draw is that this administration is striving toward a communist end. There are four major agendas for this presidency: first, the stimulus, to control and regulate and eventually run in a fascist since any industry in the country. Then there is the carbon tax, to regulate every aspect of our lives as it relates to our “carbon foot-print.” They will regulate what cars we drive, how warm our houses are, what we can and can’t throw away, how much water we are allowed to use in a given period, and effectively a control on essential resources for everyone’s everyday needs. Then there is the government takeover of health care, where the government will be allowed control of our lives as it relates to the cost associated with our care. They will dictate where we can eat and how much, what kind of television we can watch, how much exercise we must maintain in order to qualify for certain compensation, under HR 3200 they will even have access to your bank accounts so they can monitor what you spend your money on, and they will be able to control what private businesses are allowed to offer to us for whatever safety reason they feel like citing. Finally they will control free speech. There is already an effort toward this front, senate bill S. 773 will allow the president to declare an emergency and take control of private sector computer networks and internet content. He isn’t required to specify what the emergency is, but he will have the authority to declare one and take control of private networks and computers and content that has been posted on private websites. The department of homeland security has already declared “right-wing hate” speech to be a threat to national security, so imagine what the president would do with the authority to federally regulate the content of the internet. The administration lost public support for the health care debate because of the wide spread influence of information sources on the internet. They don’t want to lose that way again.



If we continue to turn a blind eye to the agendas of this presidency, then we risk losing the very liberty that this country was founded on. This is exactly why most of our constitution was written in the context of limiting the authority of federal government. We cannot just assume that tyranny can’t happen here. The constitution is just a piece of paper; it is meaningless without the power, determination, and might of the free American people standing behind it. If we don’t show our government in 2010 that we appreciate our freedoms and wish to keep them, then the government will continue to take them away from us. We must stand up for our principals.

1984 Anyone? Government Control of All Free Speech.

This is sure to become a major headline if it isn’t already. I just found, and have been skimming over a bill introduced in the senate (S. 773) called The Cybersecurity Act of 2009. From what I’ve been able to tell from the short time I’ve spent just skimming over it, this bill effectively gives the president both the power to control private sources of information on the internet in an emergency, and the power to declare what constitutes a cyber emergency.




Since the Department of Homeland Security has already declared “right-wing” speech as a threat to national security, one can imagine what can be considered a cyber emergency. I expect them to go after this very blog once given the chance. I’ll definitely be keeping you all updated on this bill as I read more closely into it as I have kept you as up to date as possible on the health care bill. This is truly despicable, but not all that unexpected after the health care bill; they were defeated by free speech on that front, so why not go for broke? This particularly hits home for me because my home town senator Evan Bayh is a cosponsor of this bill.



We, the people have demonstrated that we are too well informed for them to push through legislation in the dead of night, now they are going after our means of acquiring such information. Our “representatives” in the government have really gone too far this time. It is up to us to decide what information to believe, not to the government to declare an emergency of ‘misinformation’ and decide what they think is ok for us to know. If this is the sort of legislation we can expect from them, then they have obviously become too cozy in their positions of power. It’s time to remove them starting in 2010.

What Happened To The Idea Of The Great Melting Pot?

Whatever happened to this coveted liberal ideal that America was to be the great melting pot nation where anyone from anywhere could come, live, practice their belief, and no matter what, find a place where they could fit in and be happy. It seems now that liberals only wish to force on everyone that which they believe is right and just.

Case and point: The United States was set up with individual state governments for the sole purpose of diversity among the states. It would be the ideal liberal atmosphere, where people of a certain belief could congregate in one state where the local governments law are to that individuals liking, and at the same time, another individual with polar opposite beliefs can live in another state where the laws are to that persons liking. This was the purpose for the tenth amendment, to ensure that everyone from all corners of the earth could come here and find a governing atmosphere that they like.

Ok, now time for the point. I have just described to you what would seem to be the perfect liberal world. Everyone can believe what they want, and live their life how they choose, no matter what they believe. Now, however, liberals seem to be more and more in favor of sweeping federal legislation which forces their particular beliefs on everyone. A great example of this would be the health care debate. There are a few states out there that already have state run health insurance (forgive me, but I cannot name them all off the top of my head, so sorry if I leave one out.). If an individual believes that state run health care is all that and a bag of chips, they have the god given right to move to Oregon or Massachusetts. I notice people citing the human rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as their argument for health insurance entitlement. But notice one thing; it is the pursuit of happiness (i.e. seeking out a state that suits your style of governance) not the forcing of an individual idea of happiness on all the people by the federal government (i.e. passing federal legislation that will force a particular style of governance on all the people in the country).

Under this analysis, it would seem that liberal is a term that no longer applies to those of the left, which is why people are hearing more and more terms like “statist” and “national socialist.” Because if liberals truly do wish to accommodate those with every belief from every corner of the world, they would allow individual states their own style of governance. However, this would mean that people would exist someone that do not believe as they do, and to them, it seems, this is unacceptable.

Ted Kennedy Dead.

I woke up this morning, as I’m sure many of you did, to find on my computer screen a news flash of Kennedy’s death. A death is never cause to celebrate, no matter who has died. Whether it be a late term abortion doctor, or an ultra-leftist senator, or even if it had been the president. I, as well as many others, disagreed with his policies and his stances on many issues, and believe his career in the senate should have ended after the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, but even still I would have much rather have seen him voted out of office or arrested and move on in continuing to live a fruitful life.

Leave it to Pelosi, however, to use the senator’s death to help push a political agenda. I expected nothing less than this despicable act from the speaker. What should have been a time of mourning and reflection on the accomplishments of Senator Ted Kennedy has now been turned into a guilt trip for opponents of health care. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear something along the lines of “A vote against health care reform is a vote against the life of Ted Kennedy.” When in reality Kennedy has nothing to do with the HR 3200 bill, he’s not even a co-sponsor. Pelosi has sunk to a new low in my mind, and the president would be unwise to join her in this campaign. Ted Kennedy’s life should be honored and his accomplishments remembered, not used as a martyr to ram through legislation that more than half of the people in the country want nothing to do with.

If you are a liberal and expecting to see conservatives hooting and hollering over the death of Ted Kennedy, then I suggest you look into your own party. From the sound of things, it seems like they have just been wishing upon a star for this to happen. Conservatives value life, and mourn when it is lost. For liberals in congress, however, it is just another talking point.

CIA Investigations!?

It seems only natural now that the Obama administration would turn the debate away from health care reform (a topic in which he is quickly losing support) back to CIA investigations and the famed “Torture Memos.” He must not have discussed this move with Nancy Pelosi first.

I’ll just have to tally that up as yet another promise Obama is going back on. Amazing how many people he is willing to throw under the bus when his approval ratings go down. Now they are back to going after our own Intelligence Agency, under whom I’d like to point out, we haven’t been attacked since the beginning of the war in Iraq. We are looking mighty tough to Al Qaeda right now, aren’t we? First our soldiers are required to read off Miranda Rights to prisoners of war. Now we are moving on to prosecuting our domestic efforts to prevent future attacks. It almost seems as though our president wants to turn our military into our international police, where they are never allowed to actually protect the citizens, but rather to enforce international law (as determined by the UN mind you) after the fact. Well, gee, if he’s going to do that, at least let us keep our assault weapons so we citizens can defend ourselves. Taking these measures is truly detrimental to our security. If we keep allowing ourselves to become more like the rest of the world, then we doom ourselves to their fate. Let’s take for example the fact that under Bush, while the rest of the world was taking attack after attack from terrorists, our country remained safe after 9/11.
As we’ve seen with much of recent legislation, we can’t even trust our own government to look out for our best interests. What makes us think that we can trust our lives to the rules of other governments to keep us safe? These are prisoners of war we are talking about, people who would set off a nuke in an American city and laugh about it if they had the chance, and if we have to rough them up a little to find out what they know about future attacks, then I am perfectly fine with that. If there was ever a time to interject feeling into a debate, it’s now.

It Can't Happen Here. Can It?

Over the weekend, I have continued my conquest throughout the web to make my point known about the health care reform bill proposed by the house, HR 3200. Presenting the evidence, and the relevant sections of the bill, but everywhere I go, I get the same feeling from the people I debate that are for reform. The feeling I get is that people deny what’s in the bill, or try to pretend that the sections don’t allow for such abuse from the government, because they are so attached to the hope that something like this couldn’t possibly happen here in the United States. There is a blind belief in this country that surely no one would wish to transform the greatest country on the face of the planet into just another lavish, oppressive dictatorship that would go down in history as just another failed country victim to a power hungry leader. And so many people refuse to accept this especially with Obama as that power hungry leader. So many people still see Obama as the charismatic, intelligent, ‘hope and change’ candidate that inspired them to hope for a better future. No one can deny that the man can campaign like it’s no one’s business. People don’t want to believe that their messianic leader would be tempted by the promise of unlimited power and control of every aspect of the lives of every American citizen. This is the stuff of history book, and world wars, it can’t happen here, it can’t happen to us. It’s not just oppressive government that people have this feeling about. Even things as common as horrific car accidents are things about which people have the “it couldn’t happen to me” feeling all the time. So it’s not so farfetched that people could feel this way about something that is supposed to be as far away and removed from our everyday lives as federal government. This isn’t a new thing. Throughout history, people of many countries have felt the same way. The people of Cuba, Venezuela, 1930s Germany, and the Soviet Union all thought that it couldn’t happen to them. They all had revolutionary new, charismatic leaders break through the political placenta and take charge, and radically change the lives of their countrymen and some changed the lives of people all around the world.

It can happen here, and it will if we continue to refuse to look to the past and learn from the mistakes made by other nations, and other peoples trust in their increasing government. One universal lesson that was known even 250 years ago is that the people will always know what is best for them. We cannot rely on members of our government to decide what we need and what we don’t. Because when we allow that, it is a short step from them deciding what we need, to them deciding what it is they are comfortable with us having, and at that point, we will be totally at the mercy of those with the authority to decide, without fear of retribution or rebellion, who lives, and who dies.

End of American Exceptionalism. Lower Your Expectations

Since the beginning of the campaign, we have been told about hope and change. We were going to begin the remaking of America. Yes we can. But since the election, it seems that we have been told repeatedly to lower our expectations for this new remaking of America, that our recovery is going to be a jobless one (I’m still trying to work out how that is possible). We’re being told that we are all going to have to cut back and make sacrifices, all of course while watching our leaders invest in five to eight more private jets, and take vacations every couple of months with our money; But why? Why are we being told to expect less from the fruits of our own labor? I thought we were electing the smartest people this country has ever seen. I thought they were going to save us from this big bad recession. I thought the stocks shot up the day he was elected. So why now are we being told every day that the economy keeps going down the drain? And all I hear from our leaders is essentially “too bad, you’re just going to have to deal with it.” How long are we really going to just bend over and take it? I for one have had enough.

The "myths" of health care reform

I’m going to make something very clear here in the beginning. Facts that I cite here in this blog are from the house health care bill, HR 3200 “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009.” Obama, Frank, and Pelosi can say all they want, but I will only be citing the bill itself. Now, I’ve been digging into the internet gathering up a list of those pesky, dangerous, ultra-right wing rumors and myths that everyone is talking about, I’ll be going point by point, after each “myth” I will list the sections of the bill that point out the facts for the particular “myth.” I’m not going to post the full text of the sections on here, because they are quite long. However, on the Library of Congress website, there is a service called THOMAS, where you can look up the full text of the legislation and read it, just in case you thought I was making this up. Ok, let’s begin.

1) Americans will lose their private insurance, or be funneled into the public option.

Under Sec. 102 (a)(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT
Sec. 102 (a)(2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS
So, insurance companies cannot accept new enrollments or change the terms or conditions of their current plans.

2) Health care reform will limit patient’s choices.

Sec. 123 HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Sec. 141 HEALTH CHOICES ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH CHOICES COMMISSIONER

There will be a committee designated largely by the president in charge of deciding your benefits, and an administration, largely appointed by the president, will decide what standards constitutes coverage. That applies to private companies as well.

3) Health care reform will grant the federal government access to people’s bank accounts.

Sec. 163 ADMINISTRATIVE SIMPLIFICATION
Subsection 1173A GOALS STANDARDIZED ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS
(a)(2) GOALS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS

The federal government will establish access to people’s bank accounts for electronic transactions and to determine the financial stability of patients.

4) Death panels.

Sec. 1233 ADVANCED CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION

As illustrated throughout this section. Every five years you SHALL (not, you MAY be visited. You SHALL…) be visited by advanced care consultants, to consider options such as living wills, health care proxy, hospice care, assisted suicide, and ‘your life, your choice’ handbooks. Now, if you’re going to this section looking for the specific phrase “death panel” is going to be disappointed. The term “death panel” is a metaphor for government guidance into death.
I’ve outlined the major “myths out there, if you have one that I forgot to mention or want to challenge me on, leave a comment, and I’ll get back to you on it. Enjoy.

Right-wing Fear Mongering?

I have read and seen much as of late suggesting the negative effects of everything from right-wing hate, right-wing fear mongering, etcetera. A good example can be found on this blog that I ran across last week (and whose author has now refused to allow me to comment further on). Shall I remind such journalists of possibly the greatest exploitation of public fear and ignorance in recent decades? You know of course, I will. Global Warming; oh wait, I forgot, global temperatures have leveled out this decade, so they have to call it climate change now, my mistake. Anyway, climate change has been drummed into the minds of children from the earliest points of almost all public elementary schools, much the same way that religion is taught very early on in almost all catholic schools. I can still remember from practically kindergarten on, having the old “reduce, reuse, and recycle” line forced down my throat. Of course, back then it was still global warming, and about 3-5 years before my birth it was actually global cooling. So, I guess climate change, by any other name, is still just as bitter. Later on, in the higher grades, the fear really starts to set in, where climate change (by the way, the text books still say global warming. Someone should really get on that el quicko) is taught as established, irrefutable fact, and that there is no debate on its validity; as oppose to the fact that climate change is a non-working theory which is heavily debated, and the more research goes into it, the more surprising, and unexpected findings arise; an example being the fact that every single climate model estimated a temperature increase in the past decade, and they were all wrong. Now, we’ve graduated, and are out of school; now we’re being told by our leaders and public figures that we should feel badly for driving cars, flying out to vacation spots, turning on lights in our homes, and yes, even for breathing (all of the above, I should point out, are things that our leaders and public figures do exponentially more than we average citizens). This brings me to my next point, if the theory of climate change has such a scientific consensus; why does so much of what it entails hinge on how people feel? First off, scientific consensus counts for nothing. 400 years ago, the scientific consensus was that the earth was flat, and the sun revolved around the earth. It was an unproven theory that was debated until Columbus tested it by sailing across the ocean to find land that no one knew existed. Fear was used even back then to perpetuate that theory. Now we are being made to believe that by every breath we take, we are bringing our planet closer to an extreme, uncontrollable, catastrophic change in climate. Anyone who wants to talk about political fear mongering cannot ignore climate change as the proverbial whopper of fear mongering, and that is the product of ultra-left wing, anti-capitalist groups. But this is hardly news; next time you talk to someone on the left, observe. You will find that more often than not, the debate becomes about how you should ‘feel’ about the topic. The right-wing “fear mongering” more often than not consists of substance and logic than of feeling.

So next time you turn on the news, or read something on “right-wing fear mongering” just make sure you remember which side has, for decades, used fear tactics to push an agenda to make you afraid of driving your car, flying airplanes, and even some things as simple as turning on lights in your own house and breathing.

Houston, We lost Barney

Ok, I have put this off long enough. Barney ‘let-me-answer-your-question-with-a-question’ Frank, on what planet do you spend most of your time? In the comfortable halls of Washington (Barney Frank’s world) he makes no bones about wanting to phase out private insurance and force everyone on to a single payer government plan, but back here on earth, he seems uncomfortable when faced with questions from his constituents advocating his approval of such a plan. At the risk of sounding juvenile, if it’s such a great plan, why can’t he say it to our faces? Uh-oh, I just answered a question with a question. It’s starting to rub off on me. But in all seriousness, people are not buying this pitch anymore. The republicans are not in power anymore, it is laughable for Frank to take a question about the health care bill and turn it into a republican bash-fest, and blatantly refuse to answer any uncomfortable questions about HR 3200. The American people are not stupid, sticking to a talking points memo is not going to skate you by a town hall meeting anymore. Barney Frank, I dare say, you sounded like a 5 year old little girl on the school play ground during this town hall. I am sorry; I really have a hard time believing that democrats in Washington represent the majority of democrats in this country. Sometimes, I get the feeling that they think we the people, the “mobs” belong in the Smithsonian. Anytime they refer to opposing points of view, it is with contempt. If you are a liberal, or even just left of center, I would like to hear from you. Is this how you want your representatives behaving before the people? Whether you agree with protesters or not, I would think you would want to see your representatives logically debating them to make them look stupid and wrong. But all this ‘I am rubber; you are glue’ equivalent strategy of debate does is make Frank look like a child. I can’t believe that you wouldn’t want to hold your government representatives to a higher standard than that. I know I would for any republican.

Bible School in Texas

Just today I was browsing around and saw a link up from one of my lib friends to a story about the bible classes taking place in Texas public schools. The source of the link leads back to Keith Olbermann’s website to a video that included his “worlds worse” segment that mentioned the bible school classes. One can imagine the stance taken by the pundit that humors analytical input from Janeane Garofalo. What Olbermann forgot to mention was that the classes are elective, and by no stretch of the imagination mandatory. This is a classic example of typical liberalism. Instead of granting individuals the freedom to choose what they want to study and learn, they restrict the curriculum down to global warming, gender, and racial sensitivity classes. There really is not much to say about this subject. Just illustrating the liberals intolerance to any point of view other than their own.

Media repeaters at work.

I happened to be flipping across news channels the other day and NBC was doing a “report” on the health care debate. During their segment they had cited polls about various things that Americans believed was in the bill. I only caught glimpses of it as I was eating dinner at the time, so I won’t even try to recite their polling data, that and the data found has nothing to do with the point I am about to make. I have explained before that the news media had lost touch with what true original reporting was. It astonished me to realize that people trust these outlets as their only source of information about current events. First off, the segment itself was an insult to my intelligence and then intelligence of over half of the American people. To imply that concerns over current health care reform are somehow illegitimate because this is just stuff that people believe is in the bill, instead of reporting on the actual text of the bill. Secondly, this segment did not reflect true reporting by any stretch of the imagination. Anyone can take a poll, but it takes a true scholarly effort to actually go out and read the full text of the bill, and report on its actual contents. Since when did the core of journalism because more about opinions, and less about facts and original stories, and an effort to seek out the truth before your competitors. Don’t insult our intelligence by reducing the argument down to a belief. If you want to make a case for people believing something with little facts or evidence to back it up, take a look at global warming. You don’t want to take on the American people on HR 3200 because regardless of what people believe, the truth is written publicly for everyone to see.

The internet and alternative medias are an excellent tool. I dare say that that the alphabet networks have been the only source of information for too long to really think that people can see right through them. Dan Rather is a perfect example of that. The people are becoming too smart and well informed to keep trying to pull the curtain down over our eyes.

Media in a tizzy over gun carrying protesters

Now for the second time, I’m seeing headlines all over the web about a protester openly carrying guns to an Obamacare protest outside of where the president was speaking. I’m reading these stories and I must say to myself, “so what?” It’s no secret that it is an American right to own and carry a gun. It is the second amendment to the constitution. It’s also no secret that many Americans choose to own and carry a firearm of some kinds. And now with concealed carry, the only secret left is, you don’t know who does and who doesn’t. In every instance, the protest remained peaceful, (which is more than I can say for SEIU union attendees to the town halls across the country) and not one shot was fired, despite all the guns being loaded and back up ammunition being present on the person carrying. Wait, wait, I’ll eat my words. I do know why this is a big deal to a lot of people. A lot of people out there on the left and in the media can’t believe that something like this is legal. “How can this be legal, how can you justify carrying a weapon to a public forum or protest, that is so threatening, why would anyone do that?” To that I would answer, that is the point. It is meant to be threatening. In some cases, it’s meant to be threatening to ‘bad guys.’ No one is going to mess with the guy with a rifle strapped to his back and a hand gun on his waist. In other cases, it is meant to be threatening to our government. Our founders gave us the right to keep and carry deadly weapons for the sole purpose of keeping our governments in check. Our government works for us, our representatives are meant to represent us. What better incentive for them to actually do their job in representing the people and our best interests than the constant reminder that we are their boss and we retain the right and the ability to over throw them if we determine that they have forgotten who they serve and who is really in control of this country. This country is of the people, for the people, and by the people, and it is our right to make that known to our government, in case they forgot.

Health Care

Ok, let’s jump right into this. Now that I’ve gotten the introduction out of the way, you know more or less what to expect here. I probably don’t even have to tell you where I stand on the issue of health care reform. When it comes to HR 3200, I vote no, no, no, and I refuse to vote for any representative that votes to pass this through.
I have argued with many people on this subject and have found an interesting anomaly. I have found many people who are in favor of health care reform (no matter what it looks like in the end) but not one person specifically in favor of HR 3200. Not one person I have debated about this has been able to point to a particular page or section in the bill and argue “I am in favor of reform because x, y, and z and that can be found in sections a, b, and c.” However, I have read the vast majority of the bill, and I can make the argument against health care based on what the bill says. Nothing that I have heard from the president and others at the white house regarding health care reform can be supported by the contents of the bill. If the president has a plan that would allow people to keep private coverage, or a plan that wouldn’t put the government in a position to decide who lives and who dies, or a plan that wouldn’t give the government direct deposit access to every American’s bank account then I would like to see this plan in writing, because it certainly is not HR 3200. The truth is, anyone anywhere can get up and say whatever they want, but ultimately we’re not governed by what they say, we are governed by what is in legislation. I agree, health care is a right; but once you give the government power to take something away, or deny something to you, it is no longer a right. HR 3200 does just that. Let me start off by saying that supporters of Obamacare often times misspeak about what it is that they really want for health care reform. Their biggest concern about reform is health insurance. As it stands right now, any person anywhere can walk into a hospital and be diagnosed and treated with the best care in the world for anything even if they are not insured. Health care as it stands right now is a right. Now, under the world of HR 3200, you will not be allowed treatment for anything unless a government panel approves you for treatment. Everyone will be issued an electronically scan able health ID card that is scanned when you first enter a medical facility. This will tell the staff there what you have and have not been approved for, it will also have data on it about whether or not you are financially stable enough to receive certain treatment, at which point a facility can deny you certain treatment, some of which can save your life. To gather information on what treatment you should be allowed to have, the government will have access to you financial records via your bank accounts. From that information they will be able to determine what you spend your money on. Example, say the government decided to mandate how many calories are acceptable for good health. Your doctor tells you that your cholesterol is high, and you start worrying about your heart. A government panel looks into your bank records and sees that you have made what they consider to be too many trips to McDonalds. This panel will be in a position to dictate to you what food you will be allowed to have and how much. If you fail to meet the specifications, then any heart surgery that you have will be paid for out of your own pocket, and an unhealthy tax will be levied on you as a result of unhealthy habits burdening the system.

The extent that people are willing to let the government run their lives is frightening to me. In my opinion, paying for the best health care in the world is a small price to pay for the freedom to be able to go to any hospital I want and be treated in a timely fashion. Having to pay for it myself is a small price to pay for the freedom of being able to determine on my own whether or not I am worth the investment. I don’t want to be told by a panel at 75 years old, that I should really start looking at end of life options and hospices because the government just isn’t going to pay for treatment when there is a chance I’ll die next week anyway. This takes me all the way down to the core value of conservatism. I don’t believe that the government knows how to spend my money better than me. I believe that the people should be allowed to keep their money and spend it on what they choose to spend it on. But now I am digressing.
Are there problems with our current system? Yes. We will always have kinks we need to work out of any system. There is no such thing as a perfect system. If there were, people everywhere would be out of work because machines would do it all for us. But the system isn’t flawless, that is why we need people to fix it when it breaks. And I’ve never seen a mechanic fix a machine by building a bigger and more complicated machine to offset the losses of the first one; that’s because it wouldn’t work. There is work that needs to be done on this, but HR 3200 is not the answer. I’ll have more on this as the comments roll in, or the august recess ends, whichever comes first. There are a few places online you can go to read the full text of the bill. Govtrack.us is one site. The library of congress website has a section called THOMAS where you can look up any bill and read the full text. I encourage people to read it whether you agree with me or not, and come back and tell me why you support or oppose this effort.

About me and this blog.

One thing that my readers will become aware of quickly is that I will not cite stories in the associated press and the main stream media very often outside of criticism. This blog will be a reflection of the world how I see it. You will read, here, experiences that I have in my own life as an American citizen. Personally, I see the associated press as a repeating things that they have been told, or things that they hear. They have given up on real, original journalism.

Now, I’m not claiming to be a real, original journalist, nor will I attempt to claim that I am unbiased; another thing my readers will become quickly aware of is that I am very conservative. I believe in conservative values and principals, and am not afraid to argue on behalf of them. I’m still new to this site and I plan to make it my first priority to get comments set up the way that I like so that you will have a chance to comment on my blogs (whether that be to praise or criticize), and yet still retain the ability to weed out non-constructive, unintelligent spam. For example, one thing I will not accept is if someone posts a comment calling me a racist, and the only evidence they are able to cite is either that I am a white republican, or that I disagree with Obama. However, if you believe that something I have said is “racist” then I would be more than happy to debate you to prove that I am right and you are wrong. This is one of the first things I’d like to do, but please be patient, I’m still new at this.

Let’s get this out of the way now, because, I’m sure that some opponents of what I have to say will try to prove the illegitimacy of what I have to say based on the fact that I listen to Rush Limbaugh. Yes, I do listen to Rush, but as some of you may be able to pick up as you read my posts, I am not some zombie only capable of repeating what I hear on his show. Yes, you will hear me every now and then say some of the same things that he has said, or reference his show, but I make my own points and opinions. I live my own life, and my own experiences trump what I hear on ANY show, whether it be talk radio or on television.

Mostly I will be talking about things that I care about; it’s my blog. But that doesn’t mean that I am not open for discussion on other topics. If there is something you think is important that I haven’t touched on, and you think I should, or if you just want to know what I think about something. By all means, let me know. The biggest reason why I am here even doing this is to get the word out, and convince as many people as possible to think the way I do. And don’t kid yourself, anyone that argues has that as their main objective; just thought I’d get that out of the way too.

My ultimate goal here is to make this a place for everyone to converge and make their opinions known, whether they agree with me or not. Everyone has a right to their opinion and everyone has the right to make it known. Every day it gets easier to do that with advances in technology. I want this blog to be a place where everyone can feel welcome, and join in their equal opportunity to speak out for what they believe in. Just always remember, putting your opinion in a public forum such as this opens it up for criticism and scrutiny, so be prepared for it.

I am looking forward to discovering all my options here at this blog site to further open this up to my readers and allow you to have more ways to interact with other readers and myself. So let’s get started and see how this goes.