Billy's Hope List for 2011** I HOPE that Republican will focus in the ISSUES of our country rather than focus on seeing our President fail! COUNTRY FIRST!
H Scott Apley Hey Billy, you know where I stand on this stuff man, so I'm just going to play Devil's advocate to your point. I truly believe President Obama and most Democrats want what is best for the country. I also believe that Republicans want the same thing. Unfortunately, the two sides have fundamental differences on what is the best way to achieve that. I am a Republican, or a conservative to be more specific and it is my opinion that on most points, either the country can succeed, or the President can. Not both. I respect our President and find him to be a fine man, a charismatic speaker and a patriot. But in relation to his political vision for our country, yes, I hope he is not successful. Tuesday at 12:19pm via Facebook Mobile · Like
Billy It negatively affects your country when he is not successful, Scott! The President succeeding is bigger than, say, Kubiak for the Texans succeeding! When Bush Jr was president, I wanted him to succeed. Hated his politics, but wanted him to succeed for the betterment of our country! Tuesday at 12:26pm via Facebook Mobile · Like · 2 people
H Scott Apley Well, I think it might require a deeper defining of success and failure than a facebook discussion will allow for us to agree. I think in someways, I understand your sentiment. I mean I want the country to succeed because of good political decisions that the president makes or in spite of bad ones. But for example, I feel that the healthcare reform act that passed in 2009 is going to hurt the country. It places too much control of approx. 14% of our economy in government hands. It is going to result in increasing insurance premiums, skyrocketing medical costs, reduced quality of care and the combination of longer waits and/or rationing. Of course this was the President's plan. I am not going to hope that he is successful with something I think is so bad. The same way I did not support Bush Jr on medicare part D and his soft immigration stance. I want the country to succeed. Whether that is because of or in spite of the politicians in Washington, I could care less.Tuesday at 12:58pm · Like
Roy "It is going to result in increasing insurance premiums, skyrocketing medical costs, reduced quality of care and the combination of longer waits and/or rationing."
We already have that type of system....Tuesday at 1:33pm · Like
H Scott Apley Roy, I agree to an extent on the first two (increasing premiums & medical costs) but not at all on the second two. Right now at least, we have the best healthcare in the world and if you want/need to see a doctor or dentist you can within 1 day in 99% of cases. The only situation in which there is an out of control wait for medical care is the emergency room. Why you ask? Because it is the one little piece of our current system that is basically socialized medicine. You don't need money to go there and in most cases the patient never ends up paying the bill at all. Who does? Everyone else does in those increasing premium and medical costs we were talking about earlier. Other causes are ridiculous amounts doctors have to pay (which gets passed on to us) in malpractice premiums because we refuse to address tort reform and the ridiculous fact that insurance companies aren't allowed to compete across state lines. But let's ignore ALL of that for a second and only address your view that the current system is flawed (which I agree it does have several flaws) or broken. Is the answer to just put it out of it's misery? If a child was having one heck of a time trying to swim in 3 feet of water, woukd the solution be to add 20 feet of water? Socialized medicine (ie Obamacare, ie the public option, ie government run healthcare) has failed in every single case it has been attempted throughout human history. Why would we be immune from that same fate?Tuesday at 1:55pm · Like
Bernie @ Mr. Apley, there is a fundamental difference how you and most of us will see this issue and I tell you now that we are not going to agree and I am not going to be nice about our disagreement.Tuesday at 2:05pm · Like · 1 person
Roy In no way is "Obamacare" going to reduce our quality of care and lead to rationing....hell, Insurance companies already do that to begin with.
Tort reform doesn't do enough to reform costs.
The care we provide for the Military is socialized......Is it a failure? No. The care we provide for the elderly is socialized....Is it a failure? No.Tuesday at 2:06pm · Like
Roy The care we provide for Politicians is socialized....Is it a failure? NoTuesday at 2:07pm · Like
Bernie Number 1. for anyone in America to wish the leader of our country anything less than success should rethink his/her values and maybe even consider them selves less than an American.
I am a prior soldier, political realist and supporter of all of the Past and Present presidents of the United States. I did not vote for Bush but I did not wish him a disastrous presidency either.
There were policies that I disagreed with but I was patient to allow the political system to take affect and I knew that in 4 years I could help to vote him out of office.Tuesday at 2:10pm · Like
Bernie It should be considered a crime to not provide healthcare to ones own citizens, I lived over seas and they have national healthcare and it works very well, it does not bring down the quality of care as a matter of fact it increases the length and health of their life expecentancy.
Question how does providing health care bring down the quality of care to those that do not have health care. By the way it is does not increase the national depth. However the 14 trillion dollars we borrowed from China does, (that was Bush policy by the way) where were you on that (silent).
Canada the country to the north has national health care but the US made it illegal to go to Canda to get healthcare services or medicine (that was Bush also) so again how does providing healthcare reduce the quality of service to those that dont have healthcare and never had healthcare to begin with.Tuesday at 2:16pm · Like · 3 people
Bernie You said healthcare will drive up the cost of insurance, create long lines etcc, News flash chech your pay check, insurance goes up every year regardless and it has been since forever, so what is your point with that.Tuesday at 2:18pm · Like
Bernie Our US mail system is socialized, hell our healthcare system is semi-socialized you have heard of Medicaide and Medicare right both are semi-socialized. If you hate the man be a man and say that but do not pasify me with that rhetoric about wanting the president to succeed but not at the cost of country.Tuesday at 2:21pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie I have not seen, witnessed or heard of one person either poor or living under a bridge without healthcare picketing against this plan, but I have seen a lot of rich/wealth (WASP) and people with employer provided healthcare protesting the healthcare plan. Questions have you even read literature on the healthcare plan or are you just regurgitating FOX news, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Riely, Rush the pill popping Limbaugh etcc.Tuesday at 2:36pm · Like · 1 person
H Scott Apley @Bernie I agree there is a fundamental difference and I agree that neither will probably change our minds. As far as being nice about it, that is where we differ and how you chose to relate with others is on you. We may be miles apart here, but there is no reason we can't engage in respectful dialogue. I imagine this is uncomfortable for Billy, lol. I always get nervous when one group of my facebook friends gets into debates with another. But I don't know you, and you dont know me. I believe that political ideology is only one part of what makes up a person. There might be a hundred ways that we agree our are alike. So the fact that you and I disagree politically, doesn't preclude the idea in my mind that you are a stand up guy. Of course I'd hope you feel the same towards me, but I have no control over that.
@Roy- I would like to hear your rationale for your opinion that Obamacare will not increase costs our lead to rationing. Here is my arguement why it will. If health care become automatically available for everyone. Someone has to pay for it. In this case the government (or actually you and I) with the use of taxpayer money. Since there is not and endless amount of money, there cannot be an endless supply of care. So at some point the government will have to step in and make decisions as to what they will pay for and when (rationing). In order to offset the cost to the government, they will have to pass as much as they can onto others in the form of higher premiums and prices for out of pocket payers (rising costs).
Tort reform, interstate competition and changes in pre existing condition (a liberal stance I agree with) regulations would go a LONG way to address healthcare costs.
I'm glad you brought up both the military and the elderly. Medicare and medicaid are both failures or at least they are failing. They are heades towards insolvancy just like social security, the post office and everything else the government touches. As for the military, the care that active duty soldiers, especially those hurt in the line of duty, is STATE OF THE ART. But go to a VA hospital and look at the quality of care. Both long waits AND reduced quality (because the best doctors are gonna go where they can be best compensated in the free market. As far as the socialized part, this is probably semantics, but I think the soldiers DO pay for their care. Not with money necessarily, but with the sacrifices they make defending this country and our freedom.
The politicians??? They are the worst! Ask yourself this.if Obamacare is so great, why are government officials in congress unwilling to use it for themselves. Any service or benefit that goes to a politician is the biggest waste of tax money there is. Lifetime benefits for four years of "work"? Do any of us get that from our employers? No way.Tuesday at 2:53pm · Like · 2 people
H Scott Apley @Bernie- just noticed you posted a lot. Probably while I was making my last post. I am going to address them as soon as possible. I'm pounding these out on my EVO. Lol.Tuesday at 3:29pm · Like · 2 people
H Scott Apley @Bernie... Deep breath aaaannnndddd here I go.
Number 1. I have never understood this whole objection to someone not wanting any president to not succeed at making policy those things which we as individuals fundamentally oppose. That is not logical. Let me give you a ridiculous example. If the president said starting immediately, I want to have every single Dallas Cowboy fan rounded up an drowned in the Gulf of Mexico. Sure, that'd be fine with me (but just like all over reaching governments, eventually they will come for the Colts fans). So should we just say "I dont really want the president to drown all the Cowboy fans, but I sure do hope he is successful. No, that it ridiculous. So when Obama decided that he did need to keep Guantanamo open, I supported that. When he wanted to pass Obamacare, I HAD HOPED HE WOULD FAIL. that does not make me any less American than you. It was the left's very own Hillary Clinton who basically said just because you challenge or disagree with the current President our administration that does not mean that you're unpatriotic.
-You said you served in the military. Thank you for your service.
-you said that it should be a crime for a country not to provide healthcare to it's citizens. Why is that? Where in the constitution does it say we have a right to healthcare? What else should we have a right to. Houses? Should everyone be given a house? What about the new Jordans? It's not fair that some people can afford the new Jordans and some can't. Everyone should be able to have some new J's. Here is what I think. I believe we were created, and that this country was founded and built on the notion that either by the physical, mental or intellectual gifts that we have we should create or help to create good and services that provide us with the means to provide our personal needs we have for ourselves. I believe in every individual to be able to do that if the government would get out of peoples way and not patronize them by telling them that their lack of success or position in life is someone else's fault and by creating a system that gives to people what they are fully capable of providing for themselves. Let me ask you this. What % of "poor" unfortunate people are in that situation because of bad decision making or other factors that were in their control? I dont know the answer, but I think it deserves some thought. If I were to take a stab at a guess, I'd say 85%+. Hey, I understand the idea of having compassion for people less fortunate. It… Cont. Tuesday at 4:18pm · Like · 2 people
Vanessa I think it's incredible that United States is the only "Civilized" industrialized country in the world that does not provide healthcare for its citizens. Yet, we also have the highest healthcare costs in the world. NOT providing healthcare for all of our citizens is costing way more than coming up with a system for actually providing healthcare for everyone.
I think it's also incredible to assume that the majority of homeless people are a victim of poor decision making. Too many of them are mentally disabled, too many more are actually VETERANS who served this country and can't get crap to happen thru the V.A. program, and then there are those who made bad decisions. Does a bad decision warrant leaving someone hungry and sleeping on the streets? I would say no, but hell that's just me.
I further think that it's ridiculous for the very people who are given the job of helping the president be successful and make successful polices are the ones who are working against all of his policies... Not trying to compromise, and it's not about doing what's best for the country. John Boehner and other Republicans have flat out said that their objective is to get the president out in 2012. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU VOTED FOR SOMEONE SO THEY COULD SPEND THE NEXT 2 YEARS WORKING ON THEIR POLITICAL CAREER.... I'm waiting... Right... I thought the guys I put in office would actually work on making things better... Well making the country better... B/c they're definitely trying to make their careers better. So we can go to the extreme and act like the president has the power to drown all the Cowboy's fans but he clearly doesn't. The balance of power was created for a reason, and it's an #epicfail right now b/c the people in power don't want to do their job. They want to see the president fail.Tuesday at 4:31pm · Like · 2 people
H Scott Apley cont…Does not bring me pleasure to see people in unfortunate situations. But do you think the best situation is to have the government even things out? So Jim decides he wants to stay out of trouble, study hard in school and develop a skill he can use to make x number of dollars. On the other hand, Rick decided he really wanted those Jordans so he went and stole them because he didn't have enough money and now he is kicked out of school and does not have any marketable skill. Are these two individuals entitled to the same things in life? No. I believe completely that those of us who do achieve success have a moral obligation to assist with charitable giving, those less fortunate. Not a legal obligation for the government to take from one group of people and give it to another. Now.....as for that remaining 15% (or whatever it is) here is where I am willing to discuss. Some type of SOLVENT government option. That is something that is probably managable.
Deep breath.... More to come..Tuesday at 4:35pm · Like
Vanessa As far as socialism and capitalism, people complain about socialist programs and want the government out of their business, but I bet when it's time they won't deny medicare or social security. Those are definitely government programs, and if people really believe what they say, then start sending those checks back, and tell your grandmothers to get off of medicare b/c we're trying to get rid of socialism.
And when it comes to capitalism, it only works if there are people greedy enough to keep pushing. In theory, if everyone were honest, it might be almost perfect, however, people are not honest, and the more money they can make, the more dishonest they are. Since this is the case capitalism HAS to be regulated in order to give everyone the fair opportunity that it claims to have built in to earn and succeed.
Those so in support of the Republicans right now, who are supposed to be so fiscally responsible are happy about extending the Bush tax cuts... Really? One trillion more dollars added to the debt with no focus on payback? Go republicans... At least you and Obama could get along on this one... Oh... Speaking of Republicans and money... Let's stay in Afghanistan another 10 years and keep throwing that money down the drain...
Personally... I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I wasn't a Bush fan per se, but I was so much less a fan of the people that were running against him that I voted for the little guy... Twice... Right now, I think the whole government is bananas and the president is not the biggest problem that we have...
And do not let me get started on what happens to a black president that doesn't happen to other presidents... But I'll save that for another day.Tuesday at 4:38pm · Like · 2 people
Bernie To your point where does it says you have to have homeowners insurance in the constitution, car insurance etc.. Football is entertainment that does not pose a life or death affect on peoples lives. (bad example)
We can disagree on principal but to say that you hope he fails in his presidency is utterly ridiculous and yes Unpatriotic, for the record it is not OBAMACARE it is healthcare, that is also utter disrespect. You can challenge his politics but to say you hopes he fail shows your true colors. I did not agree with the Gulf war but I did not want the soldiers to fail or the president to fail, I want a successful resolution.
Yes it should be a crime to walk into a neighborhood, a hospital or someones home and to see them dying because they did not have or could not afford insurance to provide even preventive care, in this country as rich as it is, that is not only a crime it is an act against the basic nature and morality of christanity.
According to the constitution we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, how can you live up to that when you are being denied basic healthcare, a baby can't work to earn money to pay for health insurance, people past the age of retirement cannot compete for work to earn money to pay for health insurance.
To your point about the government being in peoples way and providing them a crutch to lean and pass blame, I have never experienced a government official trying to sell me that philosophy.
To your point about using our gifts to provide for each other, MAN IS GREEDY especially in American, we believe in all for me and screw you or I will screw you in the process to get what I want. You do remember the first 200 years of this country's history right. So Government is necessary to ensure that the needs of poor, powerless and unrepresented are protected and provided for. Statistics can be used as a helping point or a deceptive weapon, bad decesion making should not curse you for your entire existence.Tuesday at 4:40pm · Like · 2 people
H Scott Apley You said you lived over seas and there was national healthcare and it worked very well. May I ask which nation this was? As I stated earlier national HC has been tried and failed all through history. Of course in the beginning, everyone is all "koom bah yah, we got free healthcare." But over time, it errodes away the economic strength of the country. That is why all these european nations like Greece are collapsing. England is reversing it's national healthcare system and introducing austerity measures to save it's economy. France is raising the retirement age because it can't afford to pay for all it's social programs. You brought up it being illegal to go to Canada for HC. My question is why would they want to? Lower prices? It is like a 9 month wait to see a doctor. Where do Canadians or Cubans (another victim of national HC) go for their life saving medical treatment? THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! Which ever country it was with this booming national healthcare, I will make you a gentleman's wager. I bet you $50 whichever country it is, will either change course, or go broke within 25 years.
-"how does providing healthcare bring down....." Answered in my earlier post. As for the 14 trillion we borrowed and the untold trillions we will borrow(Obama just asked for a crap load more to pay for the unemployment benefit extension) from China, I AGREE WITH YOU (see, it can happen). We need to stop enslaving our economy to China. But....why do we borrow all this money from China? To pay for the garbage like national HC, 3 years (wtf?) Worth of unemployment benefits and a whole lotta other crap we can't afford.
Now, here, I'm gonna keep it real. You dont get to rattle off things at your discretion without knowing me about "where was I when Bush....(silent)" you just said that like it was fact. No sir. I was a vocal opponent of Bush's when it came to out of control government spending, Medicare Part D, getting bullied into TARP and his soft stance on immigration. See my blog post from 6/27/07 for proof (http://hsapley.blogspot.co m/2007/06/immigration-vs-r ape.html)
You told me to check my paycheck to see that my HC costs are going up. Check your Kroger receipt (especially corn. Thank you epa), it does the same thing. Inflation affects all goods and services and is acrually a sign of a strong growing economy when in small increments. The portion above that, could be addressed with the previously mentioned interstate competition and tort reform.
-us mail and medicare/medicaid. Already addressed. BOTH failures. Stamps are another item that inflate above normal (rates go up again in January) because the government has to TRY to cover it's failure and make up some of the SEVEN BILLION dollar shortfall it has every year.
Now here we go... I don't like Obama's political ideology so I must hate him. Ridiculous. 1-I don't know him personally, so I really dont know what kind of person he is. I will say that he seems to be a good man, a good husband and father, and for what it is worth, I think he has a great sense of humor. Here is something you may not believe. I was so captivated and inspired by his speech at the 2006 DNC that I thought he was someone who was new and fresh and that I could get behind. Thankfully, I did my research and discovered that while he is an amazing speaker, I did not feel his political ideology and the people he associated with were things that I was going to be ok with. So unfortunately, the romance was short lived.
You haven't witnessed any poor people complaining about health care but you have seen rich people oppose it......DUH!! What person isn't gonna be all over getting free crap and what person is going to be doing cartwheels over having money they worked hard for and made good decisions to keep and grow taken from them and given to those who dont? As a matter of fact I bet(tell me if I'm wrong) if you applied to your life you'd be against it too. I dont know you or what you do for a living. Let's just say you and ole Rick from earlier start a job on the same day. You are there on time everyday, come in on some weekends and have increased profitability by 9000% while Rick is late everyday, calls in sick all the time, makes mistakes all the time (probably why your working weekends) and actually cost your company it's biggest client who was tired of all his mistakes. Now when your annual reviews come up, not only do you get the same promotion and each get a raise, but his raise is actually more than yours because his family has been less fortunate over time than yours. You're going to be ok with that??? I don't think so. But for some reason when it is the government taken it from people who are richer than we are, we are all over it. The problem is when they run out of all the money of people richer than you, eventually they are gonna come for your money.
- you caught me. I listen to fox news and listen to Rush and Hannity. Although, you left out Beck and Houston's own Michael Berry and I can't stand Bill O'Reilly.
Sometimes I watch MSNBC with Matthews, Olbermann and Maddow and I can tell you that if that is who you happen to watch, you can have em.Tuesday at 5:48pm · Like · 2 people
H Scott Apley Vanessa- Hi.
I think it's incredible that United States is the only "Civilized" industrialized country in the world that does not provide healthcare for its citizens....."
- Again, I'm pretty sure no one is really going to change anyones mind here. Hopefully, we might gain a little insight into the way that different minded people think. The only rights we have are those given to us by God, and those given to us by the Constitution. Neither of which include Health Insurance. The price of having the freedoms that we have here in this country is responsibilities for the consequences one might receive because of the exercise of those freedoms. of the approximately 50 million uninsured Americans, the majority are middle class Americans and those under 25. Those under 25 CHOOSE not to buy insurance either through their employer or though a private company because they don’t feel like they are going to get really sick and need it any time soon. As for the rest of that middle class portion who are not insured, they site not being able to afford it as the reason. I contend they CHOOSE not to afford it. Meaning... We are a consumer driven people. We make horrible financial decisions (with the example set by our government it is no surprise). We are drowning in debt because we want things we don't have money for, put no money in savings, purchase houses twice the cost we can afford and buy 40K cars when there are 10K cars that would fill the exact same need. All of these are CHOICES. I do not believe the American tax payer should pay your insurance bill because you choose to spend your money on other things. The price of freedom. Now again, that would leave a small % of people who are UNABLE (as opposed to unwilling) to provide healthcare for themselves. I would be open to discussing options to meet the basic heath care needs of those people.
"I think it's also incredible to assume that the majority of homeless people are a victim of poor decision making."
-Well I think it is naive to think the majority of homeless people are just victims of a cruel mean world. I know that people don't get to choose where they are born or into which type of neighborhoods. I also know that some of those circumstances are harder to overcome than others. But I believe there is no situation where dedication, commitment, hard work and sacrifice will not enable a person to make ANYTHING out of their life that they want to. You fail or make a bad choice, accept the consequences, pick yourself up, dust yourself off and try again. The people who do that, are not homeless. Or at least not in any significant numbers.
"Too many of them are mentally disabled, too many more are actually VETERANS who served this country and can't get crap to happen thru the V.A. program, and then there are those who made bad decisions."
-I agreed earlier the VA sucks (of course it does, it is run by government). Do you have a number to support that claim? I don't so I am not going to dispute it. Im sure if we cut off all the able bodied homeless and revamped the welfare system so that is was more uncomfortable then work, we would free up enough money to take care of those mentally disabled or Veteran homeless, whatever that number may be.
"Does a bad decision warrant leaving someone hungry and sleeping on the streets? I would say no, but hell that's just me."
-Absolutely not. I would be homeless if that were the case. But A-no one is homeless and on the street and hungry because of “a” bad decision. More likely, a multitude of them. and B- There are too many people who have been in prison or gangs or addicted to drugs or whatever who have overcome that and become Actors and architects and CEOs and Musicians and authors etc etc etc to just throw up our hands and say "Well, their homeless, let's just just take care of them in an open ended fashion.
"I further think that it's ridiculous for the very people who are given the job of helping the president be successful and make successful polices are the ones who are working against all of his policies... Not trying to compromise, and it's not about doing what's best for the country."
-I mostly agree with you here. But it is the same for every president. When the dems took over Congress in 2006, they shut down Bush like nobody's business.
"John Boehner and other Republicans have flat out said that their objective is to get the president out in 2012....."
-In my opinion this was taken out of context. Im sure we will disagree. The post wasn't that we are going to slam the country into a ditch just so we can get rid of Obama. More like the right is now going to concentrate on slowing his “race to socialism” agenda, try to reverse as much of what he has already done as possible and make sure we show the American people the conservatism that the majority of the country want so that when the 2012 election comes along we can present a conservative candidate to the American people that they can support instead of some watered down RINO like John McCain. I also agree with you that their primary concern are THEIR careers. Democrats AND Republicans. They are all crooks because the system and the American people have allowed them to be. That is why I am a STRONG supporter of term limits for all the federal government. You're a plumber? You go to Washington for one term, then you go back to being a plumber.
"So we can go to the extreme and act like the president has the power to drown all the Cowboy's fans but he clearly doesn't."
-According the Commerce Clause of the Constitution (Which Obama took an oath to uphold then publicly scorns), they don't have the power to mandate healthcare either, but that didn't stop them. And the more power we let them slowly take, the more we open the door for a government to become so big and powerful that someday it may decide the Cowboy fans need to go but it will be too late.
"As far as socialism and capitalism, people complain about socialist programs and want the government out of their business, but I bet when it's time they won't deny medicare or social security."
-I agree. but probably for different reasons. The government made promises to Americans and we expect them to live up to them. Social Security was supposed to be temporary AND voluntary. It is NEITHER. The funds were supposed to be put in the "lock-box" used for no other reason than Social Security. WRONG. President Lyndon Johnson (Democrat) decided to crack open America's piggy bank and put money into the general fund to cover their out of control spending and they have been stealing from it every since. If it were me, I would keep to promises we have already made come hell of high water and start all people 35 to 40 and younger having a required, untouchable (by them or the government) individual IRA where instead of your 6% payroll deduction going to social security fund, have 15% into that IRA. At least instead of forcing people to pay for other people, you are at least forcing them to pay for themselves.Tuesday at 11:25pm · Like · 1 person
H Scott Apley Those are definitely government programs, and if people really believe what they say, then start sending those checks back, and tell your grandmothers to get off of medicare b/c we're trying to get rid of socialism.
"And when it comes to capitalism, it only works if there are people greedy enough to keep pushing. In theory, if everyone were honest, it might be almost perfect, however, people are not honest, and the more money they can make, the more dishonest they are. Since this is the case capitalism HAS to be regulated in order to give everyone the fair opportunity that it claims to have built in to earn and succeed."
-I quoted the whole text of this section because I actually strongly agree with you. Our WHOLE way of life, conceived with our founding is built on the premise that people act, at least generally in a way that is honest and with integrity. Therefore I agree that there needs to be oversight and regulation in place to ensure that happens. BUT only to make sure that constitution holds true and NOT to regulate to the point of manufacturing social change and further non Constitutional political agendas.
"Those so in support of the Republicans right now, who are supposed to be so fiscally responsible are happy about extending the Bush tax cuts... Really?"
"Absolutely. Let's even cut taxes. The more money we allow people to keep that was made from their own efforts, the more they have to spend and invest in the economy (the more money people have to buy movie tickets, DVD players, HEALTHCARE INSURANCE, the more A-tax revenues you will have and b-people we need to make and serve those things (job creation). Simply economics. THE CATCH IS, and maybe where we can agree, is that you cant cut taxes AND spend like a drunk sailor. Just like a household, if you are deep in debt, you cut EVERYTHING except what is absolutely necessary.
"Oh... Speaking of Republicans and money... Let's stay in Afghanistan another 10 years and keep throwing that money down the drain..."
-I agree(ish). We could stand to cut A CRAP LOAD from the military budget and still protect the country. We ABSOLUTELY need to stay on the offense in the war against terrorism and continue to take the fight to those enemies. If it were me I would get out of places like Japan, reduce our presence in places like Germany, and eliminate 75% of that from the budget and put the other 25% on our southern border to put an end to the flowing fire hose that is illegal immigration.
"Personally... I'm not a Democrat or a Republican."
=I took an ideology quiz in 1994 and could not have been more left. But time has shown me that the utopia that the dems try to paint can never exist. as long as people can benefit in a society which they do not contribute. They have no incentive to contribute and in the end, it will fall in on itself.
"Right now, I think the whole government is bananas and the president is not the biggest problem that we have..."
"And do not let me get started on what happens to a black president that doesn't happen to other presidents... But I'll save that for another day."
-I'll wait for that other day, but I am curious. Obama has received some serious criticism but I don't think any of it has any connection to him being (half)black. I also do not think it is any worse than the non stop bombardment and ridicule that Bush received. I mean Olbermann basically called him a retarded moron every night. Surely we agree that is not showing the proper respect to a sitting President??Tuesday at 11:26pm · Like · 1 person
Vanessa This could go on forever... The one thing I will say though is that if you're not black, then you can't understand what it means to be black and the extra crap that black men in particular get just because they're black... Furthermore, being black means that we also know that if you're 1/2 black in the United States, the only 1/2 of you that anyone pays attention to is the black 1/2... You don't get it easier because 1/2 of you is white... And I'm done.Wednesday at 10:46am · Like · 1 person
H Scott Apley "To your point where does it says you have to have homeowners insurance in the constitution, car insurance etc.."
-Not even close. Two massive points need to be made here. 1-Both of those examples are STATE and local mandates, not federal ones. So to answer your question, the 10th amendment (states rights) is where in the Constitution. For example, do you that California already has a version of state run health care? As a state, they have that choice (of course the economic and social disaster that is California proves my point that that type of system is unsustainable. Several cities have gone broke, they are giving IOUs in place of state tax returns and about 100,000 people are moving away to other states. I wonder when w are going to start getting our federal IOUs). Additionally, both of those examples are choice driven and not mandated by law. If you CHOOSE to own and drive a car, you must have liability insurance. If you CHOOSE to own a house, you must have HOI. 2-Both of your examples are laws that require YOU to provide YOURSELF insurance. The healthcare law requires that YOU pay for OTHERS insurance. The equivalent would be if it said that you have to go out and purchase your own health insurance.
"Football is entertainment that does not pose a life or death affect on peoples lives. (bad example)"
-I mean I stated it was an exaggerated example, but ok. My point is that right now they are taking money from rich millionaires and your ok with it. But Bernard, believe me when I tell you. If we continue to hand control of our lives over to the government, eventually they WILL come after something you do care about.
"We can disagree on principal but to say that you hope he fails in his presidency is utterly ridiculous and yes Unpatriotic,"
-We've kinda gone around and around on this so I'm not gonna beat it to death. But I will reiterate that I can not fathom how hoping the President is unsuccessful in implementing policies that I strongly oppose makes me unpatriotic. You are basically saying I should hope the president succeeds in everything he wants no matter how I feel about it. Furthermore, I really don't see what gives you the right to define my patriotism. I don't think you are unpatriotic for your views. A little misguided maybe. I mean at the end of the day if you or me or some politician gets to decide who is and is not patriotic or maybe even a that. I mean maybe we should gather up all the unpatriotic people like me who don't support the President's agenda and put them in concentration camps and have us murdered to protect the country. A crazy notion? Hopefully, yes. But I bet Hitler and the Holocaust were also crazy notions in pre 1939 Germany. 2 things. 1-I believe you have every right to have and express whatever views you have and that IS patriotic regardless of how I feel about them. And 2-I respect greatly that we have been able to engage in a civil, intelligent conversation despite being very strongly and passionately (lol) opposed to each others views.
"for the record it is not OBAMACARE it is healthcare, that is also utter disrespect."
-Relax, it is actually the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but we don't call it that. Everyone, including Democrats, call it Obamacare. The same as "the Bush Tax Cuts" (a combination of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation and the Jobsand Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Acts) or "Reaganomics". It is an association, not disrespect. And please, let's be consistent and intellectually honest. If I am utterly disrespecting President Obama for calling it Obamacare, then people are being utterly disrespectful to former President Bush for calling them the Bush Tax Cuts, correct?
"I did not agree with the Gulf war but I did not want the soldiers to fail or the president to fail, I want a successful resolution."
-Of course. I truly believe that you can oppose a war politically and simultaneously support the troops. But when an US Senator (John Kerry-MA) accuses our troops of murdering innocent woman and children in the middle of night to for his own political expediency, that is disgusting. Now THAT is utter disrespect.
"....that is not only a crime it is an act against the basic nature and morality of christanity."
-Religion is sacred to people, more so than politics so it is not for me to determine biblical interpretation for anyone. God moves us each in different spiritual ways. But since you mentioned Christian, I will touch on a couple biblical items and how I feel about them.
2 John 1:8 NIV84
Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully.
Romans 4:4 NIV84
Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation.
2 Corinthians 9:7 NIV84
Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 NIV
For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat."
The theme here is simple. If you are able to work, then you need to profuse for yourself. Now, as I have already stated, for the small% who are either physically or mentally able to work, then as a country, w have a moral (and Christian) obligation to make sure their basic needs are met. I have also previously stated that I believe whole heartedly that those who have sufficient time, talent and treasure should use it to help others who are less fortunate. But it should be done as their heart tells them and not by the compulsion of the federal government.Wednesday at 11:01am · Like · 2 people
Billy Note to everybody: my phone has NEVER worked as hard as it has on this post! Lol. This is the longest post, EVER! But I love the dialogue! Wednesday at 11:03am via Facebook Mobile · Like · 1 person
H Scott Apley "According to the constitution we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness....."
-Key word is PURSUIT. We all have an equal opportunity, that if we are willing to sacrifice, work hard, be ambitious and determined, then we can make anything of our life that we want. And that opportunity is there. The constitution does not guarantee equal results.
"people past the age of retirement cannot compete for work to earn money to pay for health insurance."
-People past the age of retirement should have made decisions throughout their lives to provide for all of their basic needs in retirement. Instead we spend that money that should be saved for retirement on flat screen tvs, ridiculously expensive houses and cars and paying credit card bills that were accumulated to pay for any number of non essential crap that should not have been a priority. THEN when it comes time to pay for their retirement, they want someone else to pay the bill. Saving used to be the priority, set aside before anything else. Now it is an afterthought. "If it is there AFTER I buy all the stuff I want, ok. But if not, all well."
"To your point about the government being in peoples way and providing them a crutch to lean and pass blame, I have never experienced a government official trying to sell me that philosophy."
-lol. Why would they? Do you think they are they are really going to come out and say what their actions show? "Hey there poor people. We know you are victims of the rich and to incompetent to be able to compete in this mean world so if you vote for us, we will take care of you and you won't even have to try. But remember, your are going to have to keep voting for us or the big bad Rich republicans will swoop in and take your free crap and you'll end up on the streets.
"To your point about using our gifts to provide for each other, MAN IS GREEDY especially in American, we believe in all for me and screw you or I will screw you in the process to get what I want. You do remember the first 200 years of this country's history right. So Government is necessary to ensure that the needs of poor, powerless and unrepresented are protected and provided for."
-Oh brother. First I'm going to argue your point in not logical, then I'm going to argue that your assertion is fundamentally incorrect.
1-Logic: so you are saying that man is greedy and unwilling to voluntarily part with any of his assets to help those less fortunate. But your answer is to give a group of men (who by your own assertion are greedy) in the government (who are the most power hungry and greedy group of individuals we have) the power to take our money and redistribute out how they see fit? Lunacy!! And basically you are throwing up your hands and saying "we give up. We are literally incapable of controlling our own lives. We need someone (the government) to come in and control it for us." But what's next? the government decides we also choose crazy haircuts for ourselves and don't look professional, so they are going to come in and decide or hair styling themselves?
2-Incorrect: You say that man is too greedy and especially Americans. I reject that notion. I agree that msn can be selfish by nature and there is plenty of greed out there, but America is the most generous and charitable nation that has ever existed in the history of time. (http://www.nptrust.org/phi lanthropy/philanthropy_sta ts.asp) When nations of the world experience tragic disasters, the US through charitable giving comes to the rescue in full force (Thailand, Haiti, etc.) If we would stop taking people's money from them, they would have even more money to give. Here is a little tidbit of information you might be surprised to hear. Did you know that of the charitable giving by Americans, Republicans donate 30% more than their Democrat counterparts. (http://richiericher.wordpr ess.com/2008/02/01/arthur- brooks-who-really-cares-th e-surprising-truth-about-c ompassionate-conservatism/) It seems that Democrats want to be VERY charitable with other peoples money, but with their own, not so much.
"Statistics can be used as a helping point or a deceptive weapon,"
-I agree they can be used in a variety of ways, but the statistics themselves are what they are.Wednesday at 11:05am · Like · 1 person
Kari I love this as well Billy! You know how I stand on the issue. To me, the Healthcare debate is not "black/white, " more, agree/disagree, and as I've stated before, I'm against the proposed plan. I agree with H. Scott, and I find it ridiculous that it was implied that he doesn't agree with the Pres. because he's not black.Wednesday at 11:36am · Unlike · 2 people
H Scott Apley Oh, I forgot about the first 200 years part. I assume (correct me if I am wrong) you are are talking about slavery. There is no doubt that slavery is a horrible scar on this nations history. But I want to highlight a few things:
1-The Founders knew slavery was immoral and wanted to include it's abolition in the constitution. They knew however that if they did, there was no way it would be ratified by the states. But these were brilliant men. And they created a perfect document. One they knew was imperfect, but that was perfectly structured to allow those imperfections to be fixed. They were very deliberate in how they worded it. "...ALL men are created equal." It didn't say all white men. They knew that eventually the horrible institution of slavery, which they could not end at that time, could be fixed in the future.
2-Just a reminder. It was primarily democrats who were slave owners and fought against it's abolition AND it was Republicans who did indeed abolish it and bring emancipation. The same held true during the civil rights era of the 60s
"The Republican Party was not so badly split as the democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes." (http://www.congresslink.or g/print_basics_histmats_ci vilrights64text.htm)
as my friend Jimmie Love would say "POW POW POW POW!!"
The facade of compassion that the democrats TRY to convince the American public of is a SHAM!!!Wednesday at 11:47am · Like · 1 person
Bernie: I read your post from yesterday, I sorted through all of the misleading rhetoric to identify some of the more passionate issues that you presented to build your house of straw on. The rest of the stuff, I consider to be interesting, emotional and opinionated page filler, kind of like drinking a glass of water after a meal to fill the remaining space in your stomach.
Be that as it may your post required a response that is based in factual accuracy. By the way No disrespect to you personally, but you can save that I like Obama as a man, husband and a father crap, you don’t know him like that. Moreover, liking him has nothing to do with wanting him to succeed or fail. Historically, the powers that be liked MLK but they still publicly mocked him and eventually murdered him for wanting civil rights, catch my drift.Wednesday at 6:35pm · Like · 2 people
Bernie: My point to all of this is this “If you are strongly against any President’s policies (in particular President elect Obama) then we can have a healthy debate and agree to disagree, but to say that you hope he fails in his presidency (as you have said) sounds to me like hate for the man and good old fashion 1900’s racism disguised as a political smoke screen.Wednesday at 6:35pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: Now point 1: you said if I may paraphrase you that all the industrialized countries with universal/national healthcare were failing and looking to change to an American fee for service system.
Let’s get: (When I say that it means I am about to get knee deep in your anus with a spade shovel—no pun intended) but let’s get it. This is what history and the facts reveal.Wednesday at 6:35pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: What is Universal health care: it is an organized health-care system of universal coverage for all members of society, combining mechanisms for health financing and service provision. The common denominator for all such programs is some form of government action aimed at extending access to health care as widely as possible and setting minimum standards of coverage.Wednesday at 6:36pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: How many industrialized countries apply this system of coverage: More than 50 industrialized nations operate a nat’l system.
How does the overall US health care rank compared to other industrialized countries? The US continues to rank 37th among industrialized nations
Where does the United States rank among them regarding Infant mortality rate: According to the World Health Organization, The UK Governments National Audit Office, overall the United States is ranked at 33 of all (all) industrialized nations.
These are the countries in front of the US, Iceland, Singapore, Japan, Sweden, Norway, Hong Kong, Finland, Czech Republic, Switzerland, S. Korea, Belgium, France, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Austria, Australia, Luxembourg, Israel, Slovenia, United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, New Zealand, Cuba, Channel Islands, Brunei, New Caledonia.
The United States continues to rank last among 19 industrialized nations when it comes to all preventable mortality rates. That is an indication that the healthcare quality improvement measures put in place over the last several years have not had their desired effect, a Senate committee heard recently
The US has the most expensive healthcare system in the world. It is almost twice as expensive as every other developed nation. Other than South Africa, America is the only developed country in the world that does not provide healthcare for all of its citizens.Wednesday at 6:36pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: If you are still reading you made it a point to say point out a country with a National healthcare system and you bet that they are going broke and looking to change their system. Let’s Get It: Australia- approximately 67% of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 81.4 years, Canada- approximately 69.8% of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 80.7years.
Australia- approximately 79.0% of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 80 years, Germany- approximately 76.9 of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 79.8 years,
Germany- approximately 81.3 of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 82.6 years, Norway- approximately 83.6 of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 80 years,
Sweden- approximately 81.7 of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 80 years, UK- approximately 81.7 of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 79.1 years,
United States - approximately 45.4 of health cost is funded by the government—life expectancy 78.1 years.Wednesday at 6:37pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: Of those countries none are looking to go to a system similar to that in any way of the United, another emotional lie debunked.
Now you said that Canadians are high-tailing it to the US for medical services, really, let’s explore that statement for correctness also.Wednesday at 6:38pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: Before Canada implemented their national health program, their health costs were the same portion of their economy as in the U.S. After they implemented their program, their costs stabilized at 9% while U.S. costs have increased to 14%.
They spend one tenth of what U.S. health care providers spend on overhead. The Canadian system is a publicly funded insurance program where costs are controlled and both hospitals and doctors are private. Any Canadian can go to any doctor or hospital in the country. Each province has its own system and its own unique way of funding it.
The great success of their system causes almost all Canadian politicians, even conservatives, to defend it vociferously. Since the wealthy as well as the middle income people have no alternative, they make sure it is funded adequately.
This together with cost controls insures that everyone including the poor, who use the same system, receives the same high quality care.Wednesday at 6:38pm · Like · 1 person
Benrie: So do Canadians actually flock to America for treatment or have we been grossly misled? Yes we have been misled- Canada has a much higher percentage of general practitioners and fewer specialists.
Canadian doctors make about one third less that American doctors and yet their satisfaction level is high because they have more time to practice medicine because paper work is minimized. The American system is not only a fee for service but also a highly competitive system to duplicate unnecessary services and bill more dollars.Wednesday at 6:39pm · Like
Bernie: The economic advantages of the Canadian system are multi-faceted. Canadians are healthier and live longer than Americans. Preventive care to an entire population minimizes expensive care associated with undetected, untreated health problems.
There is very little litigation because there is no need for awards to cover future health care costs; they are already covered. Further savings occur because there is no longer a need for a health insurance component of automobile or home insurance.
So to answer the above question Canadians are not flocking to the United States for treatment and the lines are not long and overwhelming thus the wait for services have been grossly overstated. That is another lie debunked.
Both the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting Office estimated that if we were to implement a health care system similar to the Canadian one, we could extend coverage to all Americans while saving billions of dollars annually.Wednesday at 6:39pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: How many Americans are uninsured or underinsured? According to the US Bureau in 2008, 46.3 million people or 15.4% of the population un-insurance.
The trend of rising healthcare has caused employers to drop employee coverage plans or require the employee to pay a much larger contribution.
Many of the uninsured are the working poor or are unemployed. The state with the highest percentage of uninsured was Texas.Wednesday at 6:39pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: You made a statement that inflation is the sign of a health economy, I tell you right now that is not only a lie but a big ass lie. Which Economics book did you read that from, or which official authority said that.
Inflations is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time. When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services.
Consequently, inflation also reflects erosion in the purchasing power of money of money – a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account in the economy.Wednesday at 6:40pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: High or unpredictable inflation rates are regarded as harmful to an overall economy. They add inefficiencies in the market, and make it difficult for companies to budget or plan long-term.
Inflation can act as a drag on productivity as companies are forced to shift resources away from products and services in order to focus on profit and losses from currency inflation. Uncertainty about the future purchasing power of money discourages investment and saving
What is the Cost? I will end with this: A 2009 Harvard study published in the American Journal of Public Health found more than 44,800 excess deaths annually in the United States associated with un-insurance.Wednesday at 6:40pm · Like · 1 person
Bernie: @ Kari, Scott is not saying what your are saying, he says he wants the Mr. Obama's Presidency to be a failure, you on the other hand is saying that you disagree with the proposed Healthcare program.
For the record I never called him a racist, but I did say he could keep his personal sentiments about liking the president as a husband and father, because that has nothing to do with the mans policy.
If on the other hand his rhetoric sounds racist then it is what it is. M.K.L beged and marched for freedom for all men and they said good things about him but they still killed him, so please understand what SCOTT is saying before you co-sign.
I am done commenting on this post.Wednesday at 6:45pm · Like · 1 person
Dick: @ Apley...what's this I hear about wanting our president to fail!!! did you want your parents to fail too or how about your teachers or our military or the doctors that help you come into this world! shame shame shame it is apparent that individuals with this mindset rather see anarchy than our country return to it's glory how can people complain about our president who inherited the worse set of problems this country ever faced and you want him to fail? where is your head at? It is not expected that these problems could be fixed overnight but the people that are complaining our the current president ...but i bet you are the same person that voted for the last one that caused most of the damage tell ya what... if you think you can do better run for office nobody has respect for monday night quarterbacks ( especially the ones who never played)Wednesday at 6:59pm · Like · 2 people
Vanessa: For the record, I'm not a fan of the healthcare bill that was passed; I don't think it went far enough to make sure everyone was covered. It was a compromise on a lot of fronts, but it left out some of the things that were most important to me... On the other hand, I'm glad that there is some forward motion on the issue. I applaud Bernie for taking the time to bring factual information to this post.Wednesday at 9:13pm · Like · 2 people
Bernie: thank you Vanessa. and to all that read these comments.Yesterday at 4:54am · Like
Bernie: Bug shoutout to Dave, thanks for your support, I dont try to tell people what to say or think but we must stand and support our president when people Like the gentleman (Scott) start speading this crazy, unfounded rhetoric and try to pass it off as a political difference of ideology.
Then expects little or no opposing thought in addition, don't say any thing me about slavery or the framers of the constitution knowing it was wrong, you are not morally qualified to put that forth, because if they felt that strongly convicted about slavery, they would have ended it there, at the beginning of the birth of this country.
Lastly, Pres. Lincoln only freed the slaves in the northern states (during the war, not before the war started-mind you) that did not succeed from the union and because he was loosing the war, he had no power over the southern states after they had fully succeeded from the union,
thus the war was never about freeing slaves it was about keeping the union together, so dont ever mention slavery and the good republicans of that era again. done done doneYesterday at 5:22am · Like
H Scott Apley Senator Dick.... Oh wait you're not a Senator. You are just a Monday night quarterback riding the pine like me. So I guess neither of us are gonna get any respect, huh? Not only that but you jump in here in the 4th quarter of a game that is about to end. It is frustrating enough debating Bernie and the others, but at least they have been in this behemoth, 53-comment post from the beginning. Another thing. You, much like Bernie just rattle off whatever comes to your head without any type of basis or foundation. Now I am no congressman, but I am both a member of The Montgomery County Chapter of the Texas Young Republicans and have HELD POLITICAL OFFICE in a couple other Conservative organizations. That makes me a Sunday afternoon Pro Bowl quarterback. So unless you have run for and been elected to a political office, that leaves me as the only one of us who deserves any respect. Hey, it was your rule. Yes, again, no matter how much anyone wants to try to call me racist or unpatriotic, I hope President Obama FAILS in making his political agenda American policy. I am afraid to tell you that intellectually, you are bringing a knife to a gunfight. I don't know what my parents, teachers, the military or the doctor who brought me into this world have ANYTHING to do with this conversation, but no, I do not wish they would fail. Not even the black ones (insert sarcasm here). I do not want anarchy, and I too want our country to return to its previous glory and assume its role as a global leader. We just disagree with the best way to do that. Now you talk about the problems that Obama "inherited". First, you do know that he has been President for 2 years now, right. When does he have to take credit for his failed policies? You know, like the GAZILLION dollar stimulus that we “HAD TO” pass to keep unemployment below 8%. It is currently at 9.6%. Yeah! Sign me up for a whole lot of that kind of success! Now if you scroll up about a mile and a half, you will see when I openly criticized President Bush. So while I did vote for him proudly, that does not mean that I blindly supported everything he did. And guess what? There were policies he introduced that I had hoped would FAIL!!! Another thing that deserves mentioning is that the primary factor that sent our economy spiraling out of control in the last part of 2008 was the crash of the housing market. Now why did that happen? Because of democrat inspired Housing legislation. I guess Barney Frank and Chris Dodd felt like the banks should give mortgages to anyone with a pulse. No money? No job? No problem! And when in the shock of all shocks, they couldn't pay for them….. BAM! Down comes the house of cards. President Bush recommended TWICE during his presidency that Congress needed to address the Housing situation. The Democrat Congress ignored him, and the rest as they say, is history. Let's also not forget that Democrats took control of Congress in 2006 so they were at the very least equally responsible for the problems that Obama "inherited” Now I've already given you more time than I should have. Run along. I have got bigger fish to fry.....21 hours ago · Like
H Scott Apley Oh Bernie…. I was going to be ok with the “agree to disagree”, then you went and called me a racist. No Sir. Now I know that white people are supposed to be so afraid of being called a racist that they will hide and cower to avoid even the slightest implication that they might be. Now if that is what you thought would happen, I have to tell you that you grossly misjudged me. I AM FEARLESS… I KNOW WHO AND WHAT I AM… AND IT IS TIME FOR ME TO GET ALL “KRACKA” UP IN HERE. I’m not even going to address the fail/succeed notion again because we have been there and done that. Agree to disagree. BTW, I already acknowledged that I did not know President Obama “like that” and that he SEEMED to be those things. Are you even reading my posts? You nailed one thing on the head. I am very passionate about my belief and value system. It is not fickle and does not change with the prevailing winds. As for the “interesting, emotional and opinionated page filler” Duh!!!! This whole post has been me expressing my OPINION in sharp contrast to yours and using sound principals and sometimes entertaining analogies created from my experience, my education, and my beliefs.
And it has worked. I have learned a couple of things about you. I have learned some of the political beliefs that you are equally passionate about them. And I have learned that you are ONE HECK of a copy and paster. See, here is the difference between you and I. Everything I have posted has come from my mind and my beliefs. Until now, I would have said the same about you. But if anyone can’t tell that you just became the Google-asaurus, they are kidding themselves. Now full disclosure, I have used Google a few times during all of this. But only to SUPPORT my argument, not make it for me. If I wanted to debate Google, I could have done that by myself. And btw, when I did use Google, I properly identified my source as opposed to plagiarize someone else’s data. So, why the change Bernie? Only you know for sure. But some may suggest that even though you do not like my opinions or the case that I make for them, you realized that you were no longer able to compete using only your own thoughts. Now, that is just what some people might say. Like I said, I have no interest in debating your Google data. For every site you provide saying UHC is a winner, I can site one that says it is a loser, But, let’s talk about your data for just a second. Your data, much like you, contradicts itself. You provided conflicting data for both Australia and Germany. Oopps. Which leads me to wonder, do you ever read YOUR OWN posts. As for the UK (80+% according to your data), it HAS failed there and they are one of the countries that are introducing EXTREME austerity measures to fix the broken economy created from spending money it didn’t have on things like UHC. You see Bernie, here is the problem with your “LET’S GET IT” It must be a replacement knee, my anus hole is on a whole other level and your spade is not nearly sharp enough. I can’t help it; I have to address just a couple of your points real quick before I continue to illustrate this further.
1. “Further savings occur because there is longer a need for a health insurance component of automobile or home insurance.”
-This is misleading. Do you save money on your home and auto insurance, sure. But you are going to be paying more in the various taxes used to pay for the healthcare. So if you pay $10 less for your insurance and $20 more in taxes, that is not savings. Simple math.
2. “How many Americans are uninsured or underinsured? According to the US Bureau in 2008, 46.3 million people or 15.4% of the population un-insurance.
The trend of rising healthcare has caused employers to drop employee coverage plans or require the employee to pay a much larger contribution.”
-Yes Googletron, those are the same numbers I sighted early on without the help of the US (Census) Bureau. Go ask a business owner what is the cause of the increased prices that are forcing many of them to discontinue providing HC benefits to their employees. I will wager that their answer is going to be increased government regulation, additional taxes and the implementation of the new HC law.
Time to resume with your schooling, first by me, then by our mutual friend, Google.
Bernie, you know just enough to be dangerous man. First, thank you for the dictionary definition of inflation, but I’m sure I’ve got it. Your point is simplistic and misleading, which at the end of the day makes it incorrect. Yes, inflation is the rise in the general level of prices in an economy over time. What you leave out is that wages also inflate over time and in the United States, over time, at a higher rate than goods and services. So let me dumb that down for you. If you make $100 to make a widget in 2010 and a whatchamacallit costs $10 dollars, you are left with the ability to buy 9 more whatchamacallits. Now, let’s move on to 2011 and say that wages inflate by 1.25% bringing our income to $101.25 and our whatchamacallit inflates by 1% bringing it’s cost to $10.10. So after we purchase our first whatchamacallit, we have the ability to purchase 9.024 more of them and thus, AN INCREASE in purchasing power. So as our population grows, and thus there are additional people making and purchasing goods and services, the federal reserve must introduce new money into the economy (inflation) to support and sustain it AND proving my point that inflation in small amounts over time is a sign of a healthy and growing economy. To answer your question, you can find that pretty much in any economics book that you open. Later you mention “High and unpredictable inflation is regarded as harmful to an overall economy. I agree. Do you know what causes that? Printing trillions of dollars out of thin air to pay for stimulus packages and Healthcare laws we don’t have the money for.
Here is the first Google link that came up when I searched…
H Scott Apley And now here we go… Racism. Yep, I’m gonna go there. In case you missed it earlier…..FEARLESS.
Before I get started, let me first give a sincere thank you to Kari for openly supporting at least some of my thoughts and ideas. I don’t presume she agrees with all of my points. As we can see, that brought some unwarranted criticism her way for offering her opinion and to her, I am sorry for that.
Now I am going to start with Vanessa. I FULLY ACKNOWLEDGE SHE DID NOT CALL ME A RACIST. But she did point out that I do not know what it is like to be a black man. Ummm, Correct. I also have no idea what it is like to be goldfish and even less of an idea of what it is like to be a stapler. Btw, you don’t know what it is like to be a black man either. But here is what I do know. I am educated and I have seen and studied history, so I am able to comprehend, and thus empathize with what Black men (and woman and children) have experienced at different times throughout history. Little info about me. Sure, I know I am this strikingly handsome gentleman now, but in 2005, before having gastric bypass surgery, I weighed 539 lbs (WOWZA!!!!). So since we are stating the plainly obvious, you ma’am, have no idea what it is like to weigh 539 lbs. Now, being the conservative that I am, I take responsibility for getting that hugenormous. I made CHOICES that were unhealthy and the consequences were mine alone. I did not try to find someone to blame like McDonald’s or a lack of motherly hugs when I was but a small tike, I owned it. What is my point? My point is that I will argue that the chubby/fat/overweight/obes e people in this country are discriminated against and prejudged AT LEAST as much as African Americans. Of course that is a subjective claim that can’t be proven, but we can have the conversation if you want.
Now back to the more general topic. It just DRIVES ME CRAZY that people (in general from my experience) are of the opinion that racism can only exist when it is a white person who dislikes other races in general and African Americans specifically. That is BANANAS! Is there racism in this country, of course there is. Is that horrible? You betcha. But in 2010, racism is not the overwhelming and pervasive negative force that it was in, let’s say the 1960’s. But there are people like Quanell X, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson who make it a point to convince you that it is. Why? Because that is how they make their living. If they admit that racism, while still in existence and still a ignorant mindset, is not the plague on this country that it once was, they would be out of a JOB! They are going to find every opportunity to claim racism. Which is ironic, cause all it does is undermine addressing those cases, which are ACTUALLY racism. I am going to go out and offer an undocumented opinion. If I were to guess what percentage of the population is a textbook racist, I would say <5%.>
I have a question for the black men and women in the group. If you were to work hard all your life, study hard in school and make good decisions and then when you went to apply for a job they told you they were going to hire the white applicant because while he doesn’t have your qualifications, he a better fit for xyz reasons. How would you feel? Would you consider that racism? So why then would it be ANY different for a white man in the same position who is told he will not be hired because of Affirmative Action, i.e. government sanctioned racism. The double standard is ridiculous. Everybody SAYS they want to be treated equally, but in reality, they embrace a system that patronizes them and says “You can’t do this on your own, so we are going to have to help you out” Anyone who subscribes to that notion, HAS BEEN BAMBOOZLED. What do I want? I want to go into any competitive situation and know that weather I win or lose, it will be because of what I brought to that situation and that the playing field was fair. That is all. Nothing more. I mean let us take a look at our current President (yep, he is my President too). According to Vanessa, he is black. So that means that a black man has taken advantage of the opportunities in his life, made good decisions and sacrificed and because of it was elected to the MOST POWERFUL position in the free world. What other evidence do you need to show you that if you are willing to do those things, you can be ANYTHING you want!
Now are my words incendiary? Sure. And by design. And I expect the response to these posts to contain even more attacks against me. But I do not care. Again, I know who and what I am. My guess, is that while you won’t talk about it in public, or admit it here, to varying degrees, deep down you know that I make valid points.
Now Bernie has decided that I am a racist. Of course he made this determination with ZERO basis. Basically, he thinks because he does not like my political ideology and because I want the President to fail at implementing his policies, I hate black people. Now, he tries to double talk around by saying “That sounds like 1900’s racism….’ Then saying, “I am not saying he is a racist…..” Then immediately turn around again and say “On the other hand, if it……” But what he is saying is clear. But since we get to just throw around accusations without and proof or basis, I think Bernie has sex with barnyard animals. I mean I am not saying that he does have sex with barnyard animals, but he sure does sound like the kind of person who would have sex with barnyard animals. I guess you will have to make up your mind on that.
And now I am done commenting on this post.
Except that saying Lincoln freeing the slave was only political is ignorant. What about the voting record between Republicans and Democrats on Civil Rights issues since 1933. Back up your statements. I don’t just talk crazy and not back it up21 hours ago · Like
Dick: Typical republican finger pointing with no real substance you honestly expect to make a charged statement with no recourse.. And just so you know I served 20 military service with combat service so no I am not sitting on the bench like you I actually started and of it wasn't for people like myself you would not have the freedoms to make the statements you make 11 hours ago · Like · 1 person
H Scott Apley @ Dick. Can we please, for all that is holy in this world, stay consistent in our comments. YOU said that I was a Monday night quarterback because I have not run for political office. I made my point and insinuated that you yourself have not run for any office, which you do not dispute. IF you had said that I have never been in the military (which you have no fricking clue whether I have or not), I would have told you that you are right. I have never had the distinguished honor of serving in the military. I also would have told you that anyone who has, deserves a level of reverence and respect that can never fully be reached.
1. Like I said to Bernie earlier, THANK YOU for your service. For that, I respect you AND your family friends for that sacrifice and for the willingness to fight for the rest of us.
2. Since we are talking about respect for the military (that's right, you guys keep setting them up, and I keep knocking them down), how about we SHOW them our respect by getting them their ballots on time so they, who deserve it more than any, can participate in our national election process. It is the Republicans, NOT Democrats who are fighting for that. Do you know why? Because by a HUGE majority, men and women who serve in the military tend to be supportive of Republican/Conservative agendas.
Now I am not clear on this finger pointing business. I am not sure how much more substantive my arguments can get, I make my point AND TEHN I back it up with at the very least, a logical explanation. And who have I pointed fingers at? Let's see. I have pointed the finger at myself for my weight gain, I have pointed the finger at Bush for Medicare Part D, TARP and his Immigration stance, I have pointed the finger at Democrats for having a poor record on Civil Rights issues (and backed it up), I have pointed the finger and UHC and other huge social programs of eroding away the financial strength and therefore national security of many nations, I have pointed the finger at the military for being heros with no equal, I have pointed a finger at Bernard for potentially having sex with barnyard animals and I have pointed the finger at President Obama for pushing a political agenda that I think is horrible for this county.
Now what about my adversaries in this conversation? Collectively they have pointed the finger at Bush, Me, White people, Republicans and Abraham Lincoln. A tad bit biased, don't you think?
But, in the spirit of Hope and Change, I have come to a decision. I have CHANGED my mind. I no longer hope he fails. My HOPE is that he succeeds. Succeeds at taking the title of the WORST President of the United States in the last hundred years. And I HOPE he succeeds with FLYING COLORS!!!8 hours ago · Like
H Scott Apley Billy, my vote would be Jimmy Carter or Woodrow Wilson. And there are several Republicans that I would put above Bush Jr. on the Republican side. Bush Senior and Nixon to name a couple. Just for fun reading, and know I usually dont put a lot of stock in what wikipedia says, here is an article I found. You'll see it has Bush pretty low in most of the polls. Only time will tell I guess.
Vanessa, not exactly sure what you are referring to as childish. The only thing I've said that I agree could be childish is about the barnyard animals. Do I think there is really any possibly that it is true? Of course not. My intention was to be both provocative AND illustrate an important point. You can not go around and make disparaging accusations about people without any evidence to support it. I think that is childish and immature.
Well, it seems this post has finally run its course. Poor Susan, Michelle and Shelly. They probably had no clue what they we're signing up for when they commented at the beginning of this epic post. Lol. I have enjoyed it and have actually learned some new things (positive ones) about some of you and your beliefs. It is clear (CRYSTAL CLEAR) that we don't agree on much ideologically, but I find it refreshing that we were able to find a couple of points of agreement, no matter how few they were. I am both extremely greatful and blessed beyond what I deserve to live in a country where we can have this discussion without fear of political persecution.
So I will end on a positive note. I see that a lot of us are from Sam Houston. So... Eat Em Up Kats!7 hours ago · Like