Diogenes, What discussion is it that you think we should be engaging in?
This is such a non-issue really, when you think about it..... There is a group in this Nation that are Marxists, a part of the extreme far left, who want America to be a socialist Nation-State, on a par with third world and fourth world Nation-States. These folks are clearly Anti-American, all of which are a part and parcel of the Democrat Party in this Nation, and many of which have reached high levels of both our federal and state governments. The remainder of these far left extremist "liberal" individuals, who are quite vocal, but nevertheless still a minority in this Nation, are for the most part, not well read, ill informed and are usually ignorant of politics, government, world affairs and current events, so they go along with this "Feel Good/Let's provide Health Care To Everyone/Kum-Bay-Yah" horse hockey pushed by the "Socialist Far Left Extremists"; and these individuals fail to see the actual evil intent behind the socialist, Anti-American movement. This is usually always the case with most "liberal" causes and issues. The health care debate is a non-issue, the American people do not want the precepts of socialized medicine in this Nation. We don't want a socialist Nation-State period. Instead of focusing on a comprehensive energy plan, and our National Security, President Obama and his Marxist Administration attempt to divert the Nation's attention away from his failed economic policy, and both his overt and subliminal attempts to make our Nation a collective Nation. On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Diogenes <[email protected]> wrote: > > If we would remover the histrionics and hysteria the radical right and > left are creating about health care in the US we maybe able to form a > coherent and workable plan. But, so much emotion and misinformation on > all sides is making rational discussion impossible. Wasting time and > disruption of meaningful discussion is the problem. Rather then > listening and then responding in a reasonable fashion is not what > sells newspapers or feeds the 24hr news cycle, so illiterate children > the American public squanders the resources of the country on puerile > comments ? The bigger question is no one is asking is who benefits > from this childish behavior. > > On Aug 12, 12:56 pm, Bruce Majors <[email protected]> wrote: > > The Rubes of EngagementWhy there's nothing "un-American" about the health > > care protests > > > > David Harsanyi <http://www.reason.com/contrib/show/722.html> | August > 12, > > 2009 > > They own the bully pulpit. They enjoy a mandate. They can move the votes. > > They dictate the debate. They write the legislation. They monopolize the > > coverage. > > > > When it comes to politics, Democrats are U.S. Steel, Ma Bell, and Google > all > > rolled into one. And yet because of a mystifying cosmic event, they are > also > > victims. > > > > In a recent editorial in *USA Today*, Democratic House Speaker Nancy > Pelosi > > and sidekick Steny Hoyer grumbled about how reactionaries are shutting > down > > the voices of the enlightenment on health care. They accused town hall > > insurrectionists of being "afraid not just of differing views—but of the > > facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American." > > > > On one point, at least, Pelosi is correct: Many protesters are terrified > of > > fact. Because the fact is every iteration of health care "reform" in > > Washington is intended to lead us to a single-payer system, which would > not > > only wreck innovation and competition but also inject bean-counting > > bureaucrats into our health care decisions, from zygote to cremation. > > > > But the notion that grass-roots opponents have the capacity—even by > acting > > boorishly at a smattering of town hall meetings (rudeness, last anyone > > checked, still is protected by the First Amendment)—to "drown out" the > > voices of Washington is what our president might call silly. > > > > Pelosi's party operates (in large margins) both houses of Congress, as > well > > as the presidency. Elected fairly and squarely by the American people, no > > one can stop Democrats from passing any piece of legislation they desire, > > even if it controls and dispenses a good chunk of the American economy. > > > > The Republican Party, as we all know, is as impotent as it is leaderless. > > Democrats could pass health care reform today without the benefit of a > > solitary GOP vote. Democrats certainly don't need the blessing of the mob > of > > irate Brooks Brothers-wearing, un-American, swastika-toting agitators. > > > > If the government-run health bill doesn't pass, it won't be the result of > > anyone's voice being quashed. In fact, I would be curious to meet the > > herculean life-form that has the capability to "drown out" either > President > > Barack Obama or Pelosi. > > > > No television, radio, or Web site is immune from the rhetorical > maneuverings > > of our dear leader. Not even "American Idol" could stop Obama from > appearing > > in five prime-time news conferences already. (George W. Bush had four his > > entire presidency. Don't get me wrong, though; that was best for everyone > > involved.) If we had any more Obama, he'd require his own station. Oh, > wait. > > ... > > > > Not long ago, ABC News aired a prime-time health care reform > misinformercial > > directly from the White House. Not a single critic was allotted serious > time > > to dispel this hourlong homage to munificent leadership. This, despite > the > > fact that John Stossel, one of ABC News' most popular personalities (and > one > > of the most effective opponents of government-run health care), was, I > > assume, available to question the president. > > > > If Obama desired a vigorous debate, as he claims, he would debate > > vigorously. Instead, the president has launched snitch e-mails and a > > "reality check" section on the White House Web site, which allows the > > administration to conflate over-the-top accusations (e.g., "death > panels"; > > the only thing being euthanized, of course, would be quality health care) > > with completely legitimate concerns (the "public option" and how it would > > displace tens of millions from their current doctors and insurance). > > > > Now a "drowned-out" Pelosi has headed to the pages of the newspaper with > the > > largest circulation in the nation to accuse the growing number of > involved > > citizens who feel the health care agenda threatens their livelihoods and > the > > country's future of acting "un-American." How's that for vigorous debate? > > > > The problem for government-run health care proponents isn't that debate > is > > being "drowned out" by fanatical mobs. Quite the opposite. Their problem > is > > that too many people are finally listening. > > > > *David Harsanyi is a columnist at *The Denver Post* and the author of > *Nanny > > State*. Visit his Web site atwww.DavidHarsanyi.com.* > > > > *COPYRIGHT 2009 THE DENVER POST > > DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM <http://creators.com/>* > > > > *Discuss this article > > online.<http://www.reason.com/blog/show/135372.html#comments> > > * > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:35 PM, "Lone Wolf" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Thats right, lets pay taxes, while we work for bugger-all and expect > > > nothing in return--while the gamblers that made trillions losing > > > trillions are guaranteed $23 trillion dollars in public funds to pay > > > off their debts. Some off that $23 trillion should be spent on those > > > that contributed the money--it could certainly go to health care, > > > social services, education etc. All I am saying if we pay the money, > > > can we please have the services--no more--no less > > > > > The first thing that has to be done is to restore democracy--America > > > is a plutocracy/financial dictatorship. > > > > > It's not even a matter of socialism or capitalism. If the majority of > > > people don't want socialized medicine (though the polls show > > > otherwise) and prefer to use their taxes for other things, that's > > > fine--at the moment the public has no say in what happens in any are > > > at all affecting their lives--the don't know where their money is > > > going --there is no transparency--and corruption is out of control-- > > > big business own everything--they are screwing us and suppressing all > > > opposition and debate. > > > > > On Aug 13, 12:13 am, plainolamerican <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > What is behind the opposition to the Obama healthcare plan? > > > > --- > > > > those of us who should not be forced to pay for the healthcare of > > > > others > > > > > > your healthcare is your responsibility > > > > it is NOT an entitlement that WE should have to pay for > > > > > > On Aug 12, 3:29 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > What is behind the opposition to the Obama healthcare plan? > > > > > 12 August 2009 > > > > > > > President Obama’s proposed restructuring of the US healthcare > system > > > > > has come under ferocious attack over the past week. Right-wing > > > > > activists, in many cases organized by groups affiliated with the > > > > > Republican Party or financed by sections of the healthcare > industry, > > > > > turned out at town hall meetings to shout down Democratic > congressmen > > > > > or Obama aides. There have been death threats and some actual > > > > > violence. > > > > > > > The right-wing attack combines hysterical distortion of the > provisions > > > > > of the Obama plan (frequently, and falsely, branded as “socialized > > > > > medicine”) with an appeal to the concerns of wide layers of the > > > > > American population who sense, quite correctly, that the healthcare > > > > > restructuring being promoted in Washington will come at their > expense > > > > > and will benefit only the big corporate interests. > > > > > > > Chief among the distortions has been the claim, fostered most > notably > > > > > by former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, that > the > > > > > Obama plan promotes euthanasia and that millions of elderly people > > > > > will be hauled before a federal “death panel” to decide whether > paying > > > > > for their healthcare was warranted based on their “level of > > > > > productivity in society.” > > > > > > > The actual provision, Section 1323 of one version of legislation > that > > > > > has passed one committee in the House of Representatives, merely > > > > > states that Medicare will now reimburse doctors who hold > end-of-life > > > > > counseling sessions for beneficiaries who want to know their > options > > > > > on hospice care, living wills, and similar services. > > > > > > > Palin, who resigned as governor of Alaska July 26 in order to > pursue a > > > > > national career as spokeswoman for the fascistic wing of the > > > > > Republican Party, is appealing to the same Christian fundamentalist > > > > > elements who mobilized around the case of Terri Schiavo in 2005. > > > > > > > The popular disaffection with the Obama healthcare plan goes much > > > > > further, however, than the fanatical right-to-life constituency. > The > > > > > Obama administration has based its program for healthcare > > > > > restructuring entirely on the argument that healthcare costs are > > > > > bankrupting the US economy and that controlling and reducing these > > > > > costs is essential. > > > > > > > The logical conclusion of this policy—even if officially denied by > the > > > > > White House—is that somebody’s healthcare is too expensive and must > be > > > > > cut back or eliminated. Millions of people fear that that somebody > is > > > > > likely to be them and their families. One opinion poll published > last > > > > > week showed that 53 percent believed they would be worse off or no > > > > > better than before under the Obama plan. > > > > > > > Obama and the congressional Democrats have sought to use the > frenzied > > > > > outpourings of his right-wing critics to discredit all opposition > to > > > > > the measures that the administration is pursuing to cut social > benefit > > > > > programs like Medicare and impose even greater burdens on American > > > > > working people. > > > > > > > The crudest effort along these lines came in a column published in > > > > > USAToday Monday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority > > > > > Leader Steny Hoyer, which branded the opposition to Obama’s > healthcare > > > > > plan “un-American attacks.” They criticized the right-wing > disruptions > > > > > as an effort to suppress discussion, then pledged that the > healthcare > > > > > “reform” would mean higher-quality care, an end to insurance > company > > > > > abuses and “stability and peace of mind for the middle class.” > > > > > > > In his radio speech Saturday and at a carefully controlled > > > > ... > > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
