The Anti-JFK

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

The Anti-JFK

Postby Tom Phillips* » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:28 pm

The Anti-JFK
by Elisabeth Meinecke

Praise his charisma, his ability to relate, the supposedly debonair figure he cuts in a suit, but realize Obama emerged Tuesday as the anti-JFK with a refrain that should offend young Americans: ask what your government can do for you, not what you can do for your country.

I’m part of this young vote, an age bracket known for waging daily Wars of Independence. And this dearly-bought trait is exactly what Obama wants to rob me of.

Take his tax plan. As a young voter earning a typical starting salary, (which puts me in the 95 percent Obama has decreed “middle class”), I get a tax cut, but at the expense of 5 percent of my fellow workers, who will pick up the slack in the budget.

I know a lot of hard-working Americans -- such as my father -- who fall into that 5 percent. They’ve worked darn hard to get there, often at the expense of their health. They may live comfortably, but they’re not living like Brad Pitt, either. Yet Obama proposes I vote so that I get a tax break which my father will have to pay for. So much for being financially independent. So much for the dreams of my father.

Obama also told me Tuesday night that I had a “right” to health care. There’s a reason the Declaration of Independence does not read life, liberty, and the pursuit of health care. Depending on Uncle Sam for health care isn’t a declaration of independence -- it’s a declaration of dependence. Obama invokes a truly touching story about his mother dying of cancer and having to argue with insurance companies over coverage. But one thing is more certain than death and taxes: increased government oversight always brings more arguing, not less. Any young adult who has stood in line at the DMV to get their driver’s license can agree with that.

It’s appalling that a candidate who has reached out to young Americans with the lifeline of hope and change wants to foster a culture of dependence, and, even worse, selfishness. Every sacrifice of independence Obama asks me to make is an appeal to this cardinal sin of youth – the government owes me health care, the government owes me a share of the fiscal prosperity others have worked so hard to gain.

Yes, Obama has encouraged us to serve through his brainchild -- a massive, government-sponsored volunteer program. But even this call involves a deeper dependence on government. Since when did people need a government program to give them opportunities to serve? Charity starts with your neighbor. It does not start in Washington.

To my generation: we can do better. We can -- and should -- set a higher standard for ourselves than Obama is asking. He wants the government to hand us our health care, our education, other people’s money, even our community service. He wants us to be the generation of soup kitchens -- but with the mentality he's fostering in us, we will be the ones standing in line for handouts at the end of his term.

McCain and Palin, meanwhile, have encouraged me to shoulder responsibility, work hard, and enjoy the fruits of my labor, not someone else’s. My country fought a war for this independence. Which ticket really believes in it?
Júdica me, Deus.
Tom Phillips*
hunter
 
Posts: 1655
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: SF Bay Area, California


Postby GroundSwatter » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:38 pm

That hits the nail right on top of the head.
It's a fact that 70 percent of the people who purchase heavier tackle do so with the categorical I just lost a huge snook! Einstein Hairdo.The other 30 percent have either Tarpon Fever or are sporting a hand cramped into a claw from a deepwater grouper.
User avatar
GroundSwatter
hunter
 
Posts: 3641
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: GTMO from NE Texas

Postby WisconsinWaterfowler » Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:15 pm

Good post wonder where dude is to say that this is a load of crap?
User avatar
WisconsinWaterfowler
hunter
 
Posts: 5232
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: Southern Wisconsin

Postby Pacific Fisher » Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:35 pm

The Boogeyman is coming. :eek:
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA

Postby dudejcb » Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:12 pm

WisconsinWaterfowler wrote:Good post wonder where dude is to say that this is a load of crap?

Elizabeth sounds young and inexperienced, and has a rather narrow world view. No doubt thanks to her dad taking good care of her, and shielding her from life's more brutal realities. She's right to appreciate her dad. Good for her on that score.

she spouts a lot of nice sounding stuff that doesn't necessarily reflect reality. That's to be expected of the young, restless, and wet behind the ears. But what's your excuse?

In case you guys haven't noticed... pay attention now... when someone shows up at a hospital ER, the hospital must provide medical care even if they can't pay. Whether written in the consitution or not, that circumstance make health care a de facto right. That's just the way it is whether we like it or not. The only question we have before us is how to minimize the burden on ourselves. I've written about that enough and you either refuse to admit reality or simply don't get it. Okay, no law against not getting it. Refusing reality is a psycho sitch. Pick your poison.

Back to Liz: Jeepers creepers. If I'm understanding her correctly she claims her dad is in the top one or two percent of earners who will see a tax increase. She is right that it's a zero sum game... what money doesn't come form one place will have to come from another. But she needn't worry, she'll still have to pay unless she has a home mortgage to deduct interest, or a few kids to get that deduction. My guess is she'll pay and those making similar incomes but who have those pesky and expensive kids and medical bills and mortgage interest may actually see a little relief so they might be able to enjoy a sliver of what her dad has.

Working hard is not a class thing. Plenty of poor people work hard and sacrifice. Most have no choice. so elizabeth can take her self-ingratiating vicarious whining and put it where it belongs.

Life will probably teach her some lessons that she doesn't expect...

BTW: JFK asked those who could to do for America... ie, help the less fortunate here and abroad. He asked for Americans who could, to sacrifice for the greater good. Liz missed JFK's message altogether... but she's young and doesn't remember or hasn't read enough to know.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:48 pm

dudejcb wrote:Elizabeth sounds young and inexperienced, and has a rather narrow world view.
Much like Dude sounds to most of us.

dudejcb wrote:she spouts a lot of nice sounding stuff that doesn't necessarily reflect reality. That's to be expected of the young, restless, and wet behind the ears. But what's your excuse?
Perfect description of Obama and I have no idea what his excuse is, but I did here something that really makes me wonder. I told you how his second book made him look naive and unprepared for the job. Never read his first book that was apparently well written.

This may explain that. It's definitely thought provoking.
Obama didn't write 'Dreams from My Father'
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=77815
Seems far fetched, but he makes a compelling argument and it seems consistent with my interpretation of the 2nd book. I need to get Obama's first and see what I think.

dudejcb wrote:In case you guys haven't noticed... pay attention now... when someone shows up at a hospital ER, the hospital must provide medical care even if they can't pay. Whether written in the consitution or not, that circumstance make health care a de facto right. That's just the way it is whether we like it or not. The only question we have before us is how to minimize the burden on ourselves. I've written about that enough and you either refuse to admit reality or simply don't get it. Okay, no law against not getting it. Refusing reality is a psycho sitch. Pick your poison.
The answer is not more freebies. How would that improve things. Why would anybody pay for health insurance if it didn't get you something worthwhile. The answer is to not let the people walk away from their bills. It should be very difficult to walk into the ER without insurance and then walk away from your debt. If you want free treatment, you don't get to leave until you positively ID yourself, and then you are obligated to pay the bills or file bankruptcy if you are broke.

I think it is even more important for hungry people to be able to walk into the grocery store and walk out without having to pay. Isn't food more important than health care?

dudejcb wrote:Working hard is not a class thing. Plenty of poor people work hard and sacrifice. Most have no choice. so elizabeth can take her self-ingratiating vicarious whining and put it where it belongs.
What naive world do you live in? There are two reason people are poor that dominate all others. First, you are young. Young people should be poor for awhile. It is a good thing to worry about every nickle. Second is they make bad choices. They had lots of choices and picked the bad ones. Getting knocked up by a worthless human being is a big one. Not going to work day in and day out is another big one. This is the United States of America. You are free to pack up and move anywhere in the entire 50 states and even the U.S. territories. If you have no good choices where you live. Pick up your lazy ass and move. How do you think your famility got where it is? Nearly every American is where they are because their ancestors chose to move their. Detroit Michigan did not have a large slave base. The Poles in rural PA didn't get drug there from Europe. Move. It's America. You can go anywhere you want.

dudejcb wrote:BTW: JFK asked those who could to do for America... ie, help the less fortunate here and abroad. He asked for Americans who could, to sacrifice for the greater good. Liz missed JFK's message altogether... but she's young and doesn't remember or hasn't read enough to know.
That is how you interpret "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." It only applied to rich people and not poor people :no:

I guess you interpret "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Means he was hoping they would get affirmative action preferential benefits.

It's amazing how differently we see the world.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby dudejcb » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:05 pm

What's amazing to me is how you walk right past and ignore the obvious points I make, and instead go off on unrelated, or tenuously related, rants.

tell me. how is thinking of ways to pay less for the healthcare we already pay to provide, the same as giving out more goodies? Isn't it more like getting whatever goodies are already being given out from Walmart (that place makes my skin crawl) for less, as opposed to Cadbury that costs moe?
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:37 pm

We are giving people something out of a sense of compassion? As you describe it a "de facto right."

There are people that are taking advantage of this, many of which are illegal immigrants.

The first logical step is to figure out how to reduce the number of people taking advantage of the system. Those that can pay and choose not to or those that are illegally in this country.

My solution is to continue the legal requirement to provide compassionate emergency care. However, we need to know who we are giving this benefit to. If they can pay, then they must pay. If they are here illegally, that situation needs to be rectified. If they can't pay, they can't pay. This latter group is the only group that should be given this goodie and it is a goodie. What fraction of our benevolence is going to the third group? It varies from region to region. In the areas that have real financial problems, it is a small fraction.

You simply propose a different way to provide benefits to those that do not deserve them and argue its cheaper. That assumes that this wouldn't increase demand for the free health care. I argue it would be far cheaper to make sure it is only the truly needed that are benefitting. That is compassionate, moral, fairer, and the cheapest path with the least likelihood for subsidizing and encouraging bad behavior.

I don't see how responding to specific statements in your unrelated, or tenuously related, rants is amazing or even unexpected, but I have a hard time finding any logic in most of your responses. Emotional people rarely can stay on topic or thoughtfully consider what others say. If there were some obvious points in there, you need to make them more clearly because I didn't see any.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby dudejcb » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:01 pm

yeah I know lots of people scam the system, both little gusy and big guys. I didn't think that was what we were talking about. Fraud is a tough nut to crack. especially on DHC.

Illegal immigration is another can 'o worms. You wonder whether the system I've described will save money. HArd to say for sure, but I do know that insurance companies make a lot of profit; do a lot of advertizing, and pay advertising firms, actors, producers, dirctors, set designers, et al. just to make a freekin commercial that they then pay lots more to run and run and run till we have product recall when we get sick or need insurance. Oh yeah, let's not forget the their shareholders, their executive perks, bonuses, stock options, pre-dated stock options, and marketing boondoggles (Remember AIG's recently).

There's a lot of fat to cut in the current system. We should also do the things you propose... BUT THOSE ARE DIFFERENT ISSUES FROM WHAT LIZ RAISED!
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby GroundSwatter » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:53 pm

. . . And Socialized health care for all.

Oh about those immigrants, I have a great solution. Lets create new government "Border Patrol" positions that span the country, find illegal immigrants and deport them. Not only do you create jobs for the Border Patrol, but you also create jobs by taking out the illegal aliens that are stealing jobs. Plus if we're building a wall on the border, we can hire more people to build it thus creating more jobs. Not to mention all those new gov't workers will get health care and benefits.

Talk about stimulating the economy. Then the new border patrol positions get to go to the border and guard it or they can slip into one of the jobs they helped create. Doesn't get much better.

Plus it keeps those pesky Canadians out of Idaho for you Dude. Darn Canadians crossing the border and taking advantage of our dental plans. Oh wait, were we trying to keep the Canadians out?


Wait a second, I'm off topic.

. . . And Socialized health care for all. :cheers:


*sorry for the sarcasm, my apologies to our friends to the north.
It's a fact that 70 percent of the people who purchase heavier tackle do so with the categorical I just lost a huge snook! Einstein Hairdo.The other 30 percent have either Tarpon Fever or are sporting a hand cramped into a claw from a deepwater grouper.
User avatar
GroundSwatter
hunter
 
Posts: 3641
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: GTMO from NE Texas

Postby dudejcb » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:16 pm

a pint (or three) a day, keeps the doctor away. I'm for socialized drinking. :party:
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:35 pm

That probably explains a lot of your post :umm:

I think you should consider implementing this on your computer.
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/689859/GoogleMail_To_Prevent_Drunk_Mailing.html
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Oct 15, 2008 7:55 am

For those of you that have some idea that more government involvement in health care is a good thing. Here is a good description of how it works in pretty much every country that does what the Democrats want to do.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/health/3188745/NHS-trust-spends-12000-treating-staff-privately.htmlThe people that run it in the U.K. don't even use the system because they would have to wait too long. Good for the common folks, but they are apparently too important :thumbsdown:

When I worked in France, part of the new employee package was private insurance. Nobody uses the system that can afford to avoid it because it sucks.

Canadians that can afford it come to the U.S. to get treatments they can't get or would require a long wait.

Wait, wait, wait, is the story under all of these cases. Waiting is the last thing you want to do when you are sick. For all our flaws, we very rarely have to wait to get procedures. That isn't cheap, but do you really want to save money by putting average people on long waiting lists? The government always takes the "fat" out of the system by getting rid of or at least not buying newones for expensive specialties and machinery (like MRI machines), so the existing ones are at demand way beyond capacity. I can't argue that the given resource isn't being used efficiently, but that is little comfort when the cost of 100% utilization is a very long wait time.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby GroundSwatter » Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:46 am

Socialized health care also has a lot of abuse issues with people from other countries. One of the guys I do business with in the UK frequently complains about all the people from poorer countries, that fly to the UK and "limp off the plane." Meaning they just came to take advantage of their health care system.

. . . And Socialized health care for all


Because remember, health care is a right :thumbsup:
It's a fact that 70 percent of the people who purchase heavier tackle do so with the categorical I just lost a huge snook! Einstein Hairdo.The other 30 percent have either Tarpon Fever or are sporting a hand cramped into a claw from a deepwater grouper.
User avatar
GroundSwatter
hunter
 
Posts: 3641
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: GTMO from NE Texas

Postby dudejcb » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:41 am

Yes groundswatter,

both socialized and non-socialized healthcare have many types of abuse. For that matter any system, program, or endeavor you can mention has its abusers; insider stock trading, pre-dated stock options, military contracting, private contracting, joe the car mechanic, etc. that's the way some humans are and there is no escaping it. SLUGS EXIST! Now that that's settled and agreed upon, where do we go, what do we do, to minimize the impact of of the cheaters on the rest of us?

It is doubtful that we or any western civilization will willingly return to no health care for indigent or poor as was the case prior to the 20th century. so what, if any, ideas or thoughts do you have that might represent of possible solution in dealing with the situation as we find it, and lessen the burden placed on those of us who pay into the system?

(Remember: bitching and moaning is not a solution, and we all agree there is a problem.)
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:01 am

Most of your "abuses" are criminal acts. We should prosectute them to the fullest extent of the law :hammer: :hammer: We don't make these things legal or ignore them because a lot of people do them.

How often do you talk to the indigent? I used to do that quite a bit when I was in Atlanta. Generally, they aren't getting health care anyways because they are mentally ill (should be hosptilized / group home, but the do-gooders argue it violates their rights, which it does if we don't charge them with crimes), the drug/alcohol addicts (we need radical changes to drug laws and policies), those that are mentally ruined from drugs (we are too late for them and they go with the mentally ill), a few actual hobos that choose to be indigent. I never met a single person that would fall into the hard luck category. I know they exist, but they are a tiny piece of the puzzle, and they will have no trouble getting charity, especially if we reduce the drug addicts and mentally ill from the roles of the indigent.

The illegal immigrants that are abusing the system are not indigent. They are no different then Enron taking advantage of a poorly conceived government system. They should not get any health benefits without a bus ride back to their home country. Legal residents that are abusing the system in the same way cannot be permitted to walk away from their medical bills without having to file bankruptcy and going back to zero and starting over again. We don't want a debtors prison either, but when you go bust for whatever reason (your own making or bad luck), you have to give up basically everything and start over again.

The key is you can get the treatment, but you don't get to walk away from it. Positive ID, pay it off or go bankrupt. This should be treated the same as any other expense you have with the one exception that you don't have to prove creditworthiness for emergency medical treatment. I would even add that the state (not Federal) government is liable for these unrecovered expenses.

The KISS principle usely works (Keep it Simple Stupid), because complicated systems are very difficult to make work and are easily defeated by those that try.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests