The Health Care Fatal Conceit

Albert64 Wrote: Oct 26, 2009 8:19 PM

I don't believe that my freedom would be diminished if we had the kind of health reform being voted on in Congress. Crying about the freedom Americans are losing by requiring that everyone be covered, and providing the structure in a public option to allow more people to access affordable coverage, how is that robbing anyone of liberty? If it is, it's like robbing someone of the right to drive without a seatbelt. What a big loss. But if we as a voting public don't have the right to act freely and to propose solutions to public problems, then we have lost freedom. As the American philosopher John Dewey said, "Liberty is not just an idea, an abstract principle. It is power, effective power to do specific things. There is no such thing as...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

The Health Care Fatal Conceit

Albert64 Wrote: Oct 26, 2009 7:42 PM

Star Parker's opening line quoting Hayek as saying that socialism's basic premise is that, "man is able to shape the world around him according to his wishes" is so vague as to basically rule out any kind of government action as socialistic. So the argument follows that government should refrain from doing anything and simply let the private sector take care of everything. But that's exactly the problem we have with our health system. Conservatives are ready to attack the proposed solution without ever acknowledging that there's a problem, and that putting all our faith in private insurance companies is failing us miserably. (States available here,

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Why Parents Don't Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 06, 2009 2:20 AM

Rich D, here's the whole verse. "But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of judgment. And whoever says to his brother , 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hellfire."

I don't think I'm able to reach any very deep conclusion here, but I just think that Jesus is teaching the importance of forbearance. When Jesus is saying don't call your fellow a fool, that's setting a pretty high standard. You may disagree, but I was relating it to the abortion debate in the above post. Because the rhetoric on abortion is out of control, and when that rhetoric precedes the murder of a doctor, as happened a couple months ago, then something...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Why Parents Don't Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 05, 2009 1:55 PM

I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced. All the Bible passages that you quoted say that murder is wrong, which any sane person agrees with. But none of the passages connect abortion to murder, or even mention unborn babies. You have to ask, why did the Bible leave this ambiguous? They had abortion in ancient times. It's because it is not morally cut and dry. I personally have become very uncomfortable with abortion. But the Bible goes to great lengths to say that incest is wrong. So what do you do in the case of pregnancy by rape and incest? Is abortion wrong in that case? And if the unborn baby threatens the life of the mother, should we privilege the life of the baby over the mother? Why, because the baby is more "innocent"?
What we...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Why Parents Don't Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 05, 2009 12:41 PM

Grateful Dad writes that his kids understand "that if someone took half of their allowance each week and gave it away to the kid down the street who does no chores so that he can have equality in allowance income is WRONG."
_____
That's his example of how wealth distribution is WRONG. It was way back in the 1990s that President Clinton signed into place welfare-to-work, so even people on welfare are working, or "doing their chores." The only game in town these days is healthcare, and that's to help people who for the most part are working but uninsured. I guess you could say it's "lazy" that they didn't become rich and pay for their own healthcare, but they're working.
Army Wife writes that the "government is Caesar," and that...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Why Parents Don't Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 05, 2009 2:12 AM

And I just wanted to add, I'm not trying to be disdainful to conservatives. We need conservatives and liberals (duh!) I just wish conservatives would "use their powers for good instead of evil." For example, we have a nuclear threat from Iran that could truly undermine our way of life. Conservatives should organize a campaign to pressure Obama to confront Iran more forcefully than he has. In my opinion that would truly help our country.

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Why Parents Don't Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 05, 2009 2:06 AM

Yes, actually if the US became a fascist state that would be a huge problem for me. But Obama has shown 0 signs of fascism. People suggest that because he's eloquent he's some fascist dictator in waiting. That would make anyone who was a great speaker a fascist. And coming up with a clumsy email campaign does not make you a fascist. All you prove when you start throwing around words like fascist to talk about a democratically elected US president is that you don't understand history, or our system of government.
As for if Obama turned the country socialist (not going to happen), if we're talking about the government nationalizing major industries, from computer-tech to autos, that would concern me because it would undermine...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Why Parents Don't Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 04, 2009 11:40 PM

The only true statement in Malkin's whole piece is the first sentence, "They think we're crazy."
Actually, people like myself on the left do think it's crazy to get all up in arms about the President of the United States addressing school children. What exactly is the matter with that? It's a civics lesson, and a heck of a lot more useful than, say, subjecting a kid to the vile stuff that's written on this page calling people who don't swear by the conservative doctrine every name in the book, and not the Good Book either.
Malkin has to go all the way to Ayers and Venezuela to find sinister motives in Obama's speech. Obama has no contact with Ayers. Why do conservatives keep playing "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon"? Well I guess...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

The Top 7 Most Embarrassing Town Hall Moments for Democrats

Albert64 Wrote: Sep 01, 2009 10:36 PM

Theodore Roosevelt: "We demand that big business give the people a square deal; in return we must insist that when anyone engaged in big business honestly endeavors to do right he shall himself be given a square deal."

Andrew Jackson: "The great can protect themselves, but the poor and humble require the arm and shield of the law."

Abraham Lincoln: “I don't believe in a law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do more harm than good. So while we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.”

Franklin Delano Roosevelt: "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much it is whether we...

Share it! | Permalink

In response to:

Deep Into Saturday Night's Health Care Vote

Albert64 Wrote: Nov 22, 2009 10:39 PM

Jim Weber, you know what I'll grant you that point that conservatives give about 30 percent more to charity per family than liberals. You know, 30 percent doesn't add up to all that much when you break it down as they do in the study to $1,600 versus $1,227. But it's a valid point, and I agree that too many people on the left think in terms of government doing things that they could accomplish with their own charitable giving. But still, what does this have to do with health care? Not much. Health care is about purchasing power to drive down costs, something the government has the ability to do, it's about holding insurance companies to a standard of care and it's about ongoing costs to pay for care for the uninsured. It's also about...

Share it! | Permalink

1 - 10 Next