One Question Only: Why Did Mitt Romney and Barack Obama Socialize Medicine?

John Ransom
|
Posted: Feb 19, 2012 12:01 AM

Mac287 wrote: Mr. Ransom...have you ever read "The Lorax" by Dr.Seuss? Off topic? (eye roll) no, it is not...the ugly destruction of our beloved country has been in the hands of a two party (party?! bad choice of labels nothing "party-ish" about this group of self involved jerks)honey bees are vanishing, etc. and that's a joke to many folks(eye roll)...people are losing their homes...but hey! As long as the right party wins(which one IS the right party???)Where is the group of folks that care?- in response to As to Healing Planet Mr. President: Heel Thyself

Dear Comrade287,

I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Seuss. But The Lorax is the worst of all Dr. Seuss’ books. It’s political propaganda, that’s all.

As Mark Twain said, “Humor must not professedly teach, and it must not professedly preach, but it must do both if it would live forever.”

Seuss’ special kind of nonsense works best with the light touch, as in Horton Hears a Who. Your nonsense, comrade, on the other hand is incomprehensible.

Horton and the Grinch will live forever, while The Lorax will just be a curiosity piece of significance only to its age, just like an Awful, Terrible Medieval Romance.

As to honeybees disappearing, I have an unusual interest. My lab science at the University of Maryland was in beekeeping. I kept a hive, so I’m a little better informed on the issue than many others are.


"Like" me on Facebook and you'll get sneak peaks of columns and, as an added bonus, I will never raise your taxes. Send me email and I just might mention you on Sunday.   


Most everything that I see tells me that bees are subject to either a natural disease or a parasite and that it’s causing the collapse. But researchers are making progress. Bees won’t be disappearing anytime soon.

Honey bees by the way, aren’t native to North America, but were colonized by European settlers. Native Americans always knew when Europeans would be pushing past the frontier because of the appearance of these “white man’s” flies in advance of settlement.   

Dan_NV wrote: I used to think that liberals simply "rejected" reality and proceeded with their rose-colored version of how they wanted it to be. It is more sinister than that, they have designed an alternate universe and manipulating reality, overtly and through the media, to conform to that universe. - in response to As to Healing Planet Mr. President: Heel Thyself

Dear Dan,

Well, their cosmology doesn’t work. It’s kind of like when Lenin and Stalin realized that Marxian theory wasn’t correct; that Marxist theory failed to stake out the inevitable course of history. Instead of admitting that Marx’ view of history- which is the cornerstone of Marxism- was fatally flawed, they redefined words and meanings to force the puzzle together.

A great contemporary example is the book Primary Colors, which shows how progressives were willing to become what they say they were fighting in order to gain power.

It’s the power of the Big Lie.    

Abigail Adams wrote: You fail to mention Rick Santorum's contributions to the current crisis while Senator, his huge salary while senator (which he voted for twice), his 18M contribution of taxpayer money to the IMF, his out of control pork barrel spending, and earmarks. Romney's Mass healthcare plan, for Mass and Mass. only, is miniscule in comparison to Santorum's big government policies. - in response to No More Moonbeam Presidents

Dear Comrade Abigail,

Your accusations are off base.  I think the thing most Americans are concerned about is why Mitt Romney and Barack Obama socialized medicine while the country is facing grave financial problems. They ought to be fixing our debt problems, not adding to them.

There are only two candidates who socialized medicine in this country. Rick Santorum isn’t one of them.

Birdfighter wrote: I liked Ransom's article up until at the end he had to take his usual cheap shot at Romney. Romney is the only real chance GOP has of beating Obama. - in response to No More Moonbeam Presidents

Dear Comrade Birdfighter,

If that were true, Romney wouldn’t be having such a hard time in places like Maine and Michigan. He’s having a hard time because I think the thing most Americans are concerned about is why Mitt Romney and Barack Obama socialized medicine while the country is facing grave financial problems. They ought to be fixing our debt problems, not adding to them.

There are only two candidates who socialized medicine in this country. Newt Gingrich was not one of them.

Canetoad wrote: Townhall must very proud of the level of discussion on this thread. Lots of pseudo science, amateur theories, opinions, but no real data. I prefer to leave the science to the scientists and they pretty much agree that the planet is warming, caused by too much CO2 in our atmosphere. - in response to If Al Gore Had a Change of Heart; It’s that Big

Dear Comrade Toad,

You want to leave the science to the scientists? Why not leave the wars to the generals, or religion to the bishops and the ayatollahs? Why not leave Congress to the professional politicians or policing just to police?

I’ll tell you why we don’t: Because then we will be governed by what C.S. Lewis called “men without chests,” experts whose material power allows them to calculate every potentiality besides those of morality.

“This gives them the chance to say that he who attacks them attacks Intelligence” writes Lewis. “It is not so. They are not distinguished from other men by any unusual skill in finding truth nor any virginal ardour to pursue her. Indeed it would be strange if they were: a persevering devotion to truth, a nice sense of intellectual honour, cannot be long maintained without the aid of a sentiment which Gaius and Titius could debunk as easily as any other. It is not excess of thought but defect of fertile and generous emotion that marks them out. Their heads are no bigger than the ordinary: it is the atrophy of the chest beneath that makes them seem so.”

To put it another way: “No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts,” said Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury. “If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe.”

And If you believe in socialized medicine, banking, autos or jobs nothing is cheap.

RockinRickOwen wrote: The general stupidity of the Proglodytes (and to be honest, some of our own guys) is to assume that just because somebody wants clean air, water, and land, they MUST be an environmentalist bent on tearing down capitalism, and joining the Gorean chain gang in complaining about the weather, and actually trying to do something about it. Just as there's no contradiction in loving free market capitalism, and condemning crony capitalism and downright greed, there's no contradiction between Vahrenholt opposing polluters and opposing environmentalism. - in response to If Al Gore Had a Change of Heart; It’s that Big

Dear Rick,

Those of us who live in the West can not help but be affected by the stark natural beauty that surrounds us. In a one day drive you can see some of the most awesome mountains and some of the most awesome deserts in the world.

In a way, everyone who lives in the West is an environmentalist. We want to preserve the natural beauty around us. But we aren’t sentimental about nature.

About 150 miles away from where I live is a caldera near Aspen which exploded 36 million years ago. The debris traveled 200 miles in about fifteen minutes. The heat was so intense at ground level that the debris rode above the surface like it was riding on a wave. The left over remains of liquid rock that subsequently cooled are exposed in tablelands and buttes stretching all across the front range of the Rockies.

A disaster like that is going to kill off people, not a little petroleum more or less.

DocRoy wrote: Yeah Beck's a regular Kreskin. Only problem is he's wrong more than Dick Morris is. - in response to Obama’s Occupy Austerity Budget

Dear Comrade Doc,

That may be true or it may not be true. I don’t actually pay much attention either way to what people say. But I can tell you that in the case I cited, Beck was right. And there is no amount of back walking that can change that fact.

So smoke that comrade.   

Lovingthisgreatcountry wrote: John Ransom aka the king of class warfare. - in response to Obama’s Occupy Austerity Budget

Dear Comrade Loving,

Yeah. That’s me. Pitting class against class.

By the way, what tax bracket are you in? You know so much about me, and we know nothing about you.  

scJazz wrote: The thing that bugs me about these articles is the hubris of statements like "add 10m jobs". Hello! Like every other article points out the government doesn't add any jobs. It is a net deficit when we take $100 from Joe Taxpayer pay Bob FedEmployee $10 to oversee a program and give $90 Ron GovernmentJob to do something that Mark CommonSense would do for $30. So without reading this RINO BS at all I have to ask... WHY ARE YOU IDIOTS TALKING ABOUT CREATING JOBS AT ALL? - in response to The GOP Can Add 10 Million Jobs and $15 Trillion to US Economy without Spending a Dime

Dear Jazz,

It’s usually helpful to read the article before you pass judgment.

Heck in your case, I’d suggest that you read the headline.

What part of “without spending a dime” do you not understand?

I don’t know about Joe and Ron and Bob and Mark. But no people were federally subsidized in the making of that column.

Unfortunately we are at the point where the policies of the government are having an effect on job creation. It’s not hubris to suggest that if different policies were followed, more jobs would be created. It’s just a fact.    

TheImmutable wrote:  What a garbage article. 10 million jobs? That's utter lunacy. Estimates from anyone who knows what they're talking about are around a few hundred permanent jobs and maybe 10,000 2-year jobs. And are you really bringing our oil shale reserves into this? That's what we whack-jobs call unconventional oil. It is expensive to process and it is NOT the light sweet crude we all know and love. Some of that stuff is more solid than liquid. Also, emphasis on VERY. EXPENSIVE. Unconventional sources are last resort sources. Nobody extracts it because nobody WANTS to. It's just not profitable until the price of oil rises. - in response to Obama’s Occupy Austerity Budget

Dear Comrade Immutable,

Quite an ego there? Immutable, huh? Why not just stick with The One?

Also, does Michelle know you read and comment on Townhall while sounding out the really big words for Joe Biden?

Reading the actual article might help both of you figure the math.

First of all, years ago the breakeven point for shale and oil sands was higher- right now oil sands is about $28 per barrel while shale is less than $50- and falling fast. If exploiting shale oil is going to get the Saudis to bring down the price of oil to under $50 p/brl I’m all for it. Once it pierces $50 bucks, I’m selling everything I have and putting it all in oil.  

Secondly, if unconventional oil wasn’t profitable now why are we extracting it at Bakken and why are the Canadians doing it with oil sands? 

Bakken estimates have recently risen from 3.65 billion barrels of proven reserves to 24 billion of reserves.

The point is, why not allow the US oil industry to take chances, as they usually do, and decide for themselves what’s economical or not? 

The answer is that it impinges on your religious views, at the expense of economics for the rest of us. Because when it’s some other type of energy economics don’t seem to matter.

"[Obama’s] Secretary [of the Interior Ken] Salazar continues his personal crusade against an energy source that could change the world [Green River shale], and one which other countries including China are pursuing aggressively said Dan Kish, senior vice president for policy at the Institute for Energy Research. "His announcement that he will hold an offshore wind lease sale for wind that is not economic at two and a half times the cost of other energy shows that his excuse that oil shale is not economic is a lie."

The problems with the greatest country and greatest economy in the world are political, not economic. 

That’s all the time we have for liberals lies this week.

V/r,

JR


"Like" me on Facebook and you'll get sneak peaks of columns and, as an added bonus, I will never raise your taxes. Send me email and I just might mention you on Sunday.