Taking down worlds…one Kool-Aid drinker at a time

‘Haters’ of all that is ‘good’ unite!

It’s good to be a politician…especially if you’re one who thinks being in public office is an excuse to spend recklessly. On the other hand, if you scrutinize the spending on a popular bill, you must have something against those who benefit from the legislation in question…to which I say, “duh”; but not for the reason you think.

I read an article today entitled, GOP slams Bush pledge to veto child health care; The Courier-Journal, September 21, 2007, A- section. (Yeah, I know it’s dated, so what?) The article in question clearly shows that neither Congress nor the president gives a damn about fiscal responsibility–an obvious fact to anyone not drinking the Kool-Aid. Eight years of Bush and the neoconservative movement have really given us all something to crow about. But hey, let’s not forget they had a lot of help from the Democratic Party.

First, Congress, in the writing of this bill, made sure that families who are privileged got coverage. How privileged? I’m glad you asked; apparently, “children in families with incomes of as much as $83,000 a year” qualify for benefits under the plan.

According to the article, this was Bush’s primary objection to the legislation…and I agree with him. In fact, I’ll go one further than that. The government has no business subsidizing health care to/for anyone. That’s right. Unless you’re a veteran, it’s NOT the federal government’s responsibility to finance your health care. And you thought I was going to give you that Bush compassionate conservative B.S. No, actually, I just “hate” children (and old people). Think I’m joking? Just ask any Kool-Aid drinker. According to The Washington Post:

If the president refuses to sign the bill, if he says, with a veto, ‘I forbid 10 million children in America to have health care,’ this legislation will haunt him again and again and again,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Or how about Maryland’s Chris Van Hollen :

Anyone who votes in lock step with the president and against children’s health, they are going to hear about it back home, Van Hollen said.

For that matter, just ask any bleeding heart liberal or kowtowing neocon you can find. The response will be remarkable consistent: “You must have something against children!” Only the very dumb, the very presumptuous, or the very intellectually myopic would make such a statement. But those descriptors generally define the players in the political realm, don’t they. Or maybe, they’re just being shrewd.

(God, I hate politicians. May they “slide under the nearest gas truck and taste their own blood!”)

Here’s a common sense question: How the hell are we going to pay for this? Here’s a cold hard truth. The politicians running this scam don’t give a flip about children’s health care. They sure as hell don’t care about you. The do care about getting reelected and it certainly doesn’t hurt their chances if they pass legislation which is both popular among voters and has broad bipartisan support. Besides, with the “if you’re against this, you’re against children mentality” ruling the roost, only those who aren’t up for reelection or who have a political death wish will come out against this legislation. The irony in this situation is that in the long run it’s you and I who are quite literally paying to reelect these bozos. How much will we be paying? Try $60 billion over the next five years. That’s how much this legislation is costing us. But that’s a government projection, so you can bet your sweet ass that there will be overruns. In the end, it won’t be the children who benefit from all this, nor will it be those who have been relieved of personal responsibility, it will be those bastards the enablers put in office so they could get their pet social projects financed by the federal government.


Single Post Navigation

11 thoughts on “‘Haters’ of all that is ‘good’ unite!

  1. I have to disagree with you on this one Johnny. I understand what you’re saying about politicians, and I have no delusion that members from either party care about my daughter or your children, but the fact is, we have plenty of money. Unfortunately, we are throwing away billions “Nation Building.”

    As we speak, Iraqis (Who I really don’t care much about considering I’ve never been to Iraq, and the only Iraqi I ever met was a patient at the Psych Hospital where I used to work) are able to get “Free” health care on our dime.

    Health Insurance, and health related costs are the biggest culprits behind bankruptcies and financial ruin in this country. We spend more per capita than any other industrialized nation on health care, and we still have 45 million without insurance.

    I know people can go to the emergency room, but for those who are truly sick this is dangerous. As you know, I had major surgery earlier this year. At the time, I had no insurance because of my little business venture with “B,” and because of my daughter’s mother who was continuing to bleed me even though I had our daughter 80% of the time (If I stopped paying her she could have me locked up, and when I tried to have the order changed, she lied to prevent it. Just asking cost me a grand, and I couldn’t afford to take her back once I realized she didn’t have a “new job”) Anyway.

    The night I went to the hospital I was forced to sit in the waiting room for four hours before a Nurse finally saw me. They knew I had appendicitis, but the emergency room was packed. I was told it may be another 24 hours before I could be admitted. According to my surgeon (We ended up going to another hospital) it’s very likely my appendix split while we were waiting. Not only did this lead to a second surgery, but it also almost killed me.

    When I was released from the hospital, my bill was $48,000. Luckily, Jewish helped me, and I’m not from a poor family. But such a situation could completely ruin a family.

    I could also use my step-father as an example. At one point he was paying three to four times more in taxes than the average American earns. When he was diagnosed with lung cancer (Never smoked a day in his life), he was forced to retire. His insurance premium is over $1000 per month, and that doesn’t include co-pays for surgeries (He’s had ten, I believe, thus far), medications, Doctor visits etc. My mom estimates that they’ve paid almost 250 grand out of pocket.

    He and my mom were forced to sell their home, and move in with one of my sisters. They are lucky, but my family has more resources than the Average Joe. Such a situation would destroy many families. And such a situation can happen to anyone at anytime. (I’m almost 40, and until this year I never had surgery on even a toenail).

    Why should we care? Well, for several reasons. The first being, we have a responsibility to help one another. Says so in your Bible. Americans die from diseases, illnesses that are treatable and/or preventable including children. This is a travesty.

    Secondly, it affects all of us. As the quality of life of our fellow citizens declines, we are all impacted. We pay to make up for the costs of those without insurance, we pay to put them on “Welfare,” we pay for the crime, the bankruptcies, on and fucking on. Not to mention it creates a a cycle of perpetual poverty.

    We waste billions and billions of dollars on “Defense,” but as we see all that money is not helping us defeat our latest “enemy.” Our entire economy is set up around the Defense Industry, which means we have to have wars in order to justify the expenditure, and to keep the inventory from getting out of hand and/or outdated.

    Weapons have no intrinsic value whatsoever. They cannot be re-sold, and they add nothing to society. Their only purpose is to destroy, and to be destroyed. It’s madness.

    $60 billion over 5 years. That’s $12 billion a year. We spend that in one month in Iraq, and for what? A war that we cannot win? For oil? So Iraqis can be free?

    Fuck the Iraqis. Let them pay for their own damn “freedom.”

    Countries that provide health care score higher on quality of life surveys, and they tend to have fewer social problems than the United States. Of course there are exceptions, but the countries with quality plans (Germany, Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Ireland, Switzerland, Sweden, Italy etc) are doing just fine. Their debt is nothing compared to ours, and their economies are growing while ours stagnates.

    We have plenty of money, but we waste it needlessly on idiocy.

    I love ya Johnny, but I’ll never understand your Social Darwinism.

  2. Yeah, well…the feeling’s mutual, home slice, but I have a couple more things to say concerning your comments. (Oh, and thanks, BTW, for visiting, commenting, and just making me feel welcome around here.)

    First off, we don’t have plenty of money, fairlane. If we did, we wouldn’t be in debt up to our eyeballs. Currently, the national debt is well over $9 trillion. That’s about $30,000 per citizen and since 2006 it has continued to increase by a rate of $1.40 billion per day. And while the federal deficit is at it’s lowest point in years, (despite the war) if all things continue as they are, we’re looking at a deficit of $172 billion by 2008. That’s how much more we’re spending above and beyond what we’re taking in.

    Also, while I share, at least in principle, your angst over this war, I should add that the latest numbers from the U.S. Treasury Dept. website show that we are spending more on social programs than we are on anything else. That includes “Defense” my friend. In fact, Social spending is outpacing the Department of Defense by about 100 billion dollars per year.

    Concerning your comment about this legislation’s consistency with the bible, “love thy neighbor” from a biblical perspective has a lot more to do with personal responsibility than it does wholesale compulsory charity. We can discuss that another time if you like. But what I’m interested in presently is why suddenly it’s a good thing to legislate on so-called biblical truth. To be honest, the only reason for drudging up the ghost of JudeoChristian values is because we want the attendant legislation. But you know as well as I that as soon as legislation comes along with which we disagree, the first thing to go will be the Bible and out will come all the assertions about us being founded as a secular nation, Separation of Church and State, and that the founding fathers were all atheists, agnostics, and deists, etc. So, with all due respect (and you know I do) I’m not really buying that “argument.”

    Finally, how does the fact that health care is unaffordable make my kids your responsibility? When you reduce this down, what I hear everyone saying is that the ungodly price of health care somehow makes my children everyone else’s responsibility. For that matter you can extend the “logic” to a national health care system and it still derives the same way: It’s a disjointed syllogism that doesn’t follow. And honestly man, do you really think the government can run a health care system? Just look at how totally screwed the country is now. That’s our government in action. As far as I’m concerned, the less they have to do with us personally, the better off we’ll all be.

    Stay strong, homey!

  3. The overwhelming majority of that debt comes from military expenditures. When Reagan became President the national debt was less than a Trillion dollars. (Around 900 billion). By the time Bush Sr. left office it was almost 6 trillion.

    The idea that Reps are “Fiscal Conservatives” is a myth. Bush being the latest evidence.

    Also, I believe Bush has asked, at least twice now, for supplementals for Iraq and Afghanistan totaling over 200 billion. If I remember correctly, this money is not included in the official budget, as this money cannot be predicted.


    As you well know, military spending is often disguised within the budget, which makes it difficult, to say the least, to know exactly how much they are spending.


    Let us not forget the ridiculous contracts the government has with the defense industry that include incredible mark-ups, guaranteed payments, whether they deliver or not, and no way to recoup the money. In other words, tons of money is wasted. The F-22 being a prime example.

    Why do your kids matter to me? Well, because we live in a society, and what happens to your kids can affect my kid. When a large segment of the population is suffering it drags down everyone else, as I explained in my previous comment. We pay regardless, and I’d much rather pay upfront than afterward.

    Human life has value, weapons have none. The idea that they make us safer is iffy at best. We are constantly in conflict somewhere on this planet, and in the case of Iraq we are in a conflict we chose because the Neo-cons believe in U.S. “Manifest Destiny.” The more weapons people have the more likely they are to use them. People like to try out their new gadgets.

    The religion thing was strictly for you. Jesus fed the poor, he didn’t tell them to fend for themselves. He also said they are the ones the rest of us should watch over, and assist when and if possible. Whether you follow that or not is entirely up to you.

    If what happened to my step-father happened to you, it would devastate not only you but your entire family. I know you’ll say, “We’d make it.” But how? You couldn’t come up with $250 grand in ten years, much less four. (Neither could I). It would bankrupt you, and God knows what else would happen.

    Personally, I see nothing wrong with helping people in that situation, and the best way to help is to prevent that from ever happening because one way or another we end up paying, and the cost for the uninsured is more than for those with insurance.

    The Committee on Ways and Means has an interesting article about how hospitals charge uninsured patients much more than insured patients.

    When I was in the “horse pistol,” they charged me 30 duckets for a single Ambien. That’s 900 bucks for a month’s supply. Oxycontin doesn’t cost that much, and it’s a highly abused narcotic. (About $400 per month). My total drug bill was over 5 g’s, and I didn’t ask for shit. In fact, after 5 days I declined the Dilaudid because it was making me sick.

    I know you and that Wingnut T.L. believe the Church should step in, but that’s another issue altogether. People shouldn’t have to convert to be “Saved,” if you know what I mean.

    You’re wrong on this issue J.W., but that’s okay. You should definitely cross post this at JT.

  4. People don’t have to convert to be “saved,” holmes, if what you mean by being saved is that your felt needs are being met.

    Also, If you don’t believe the numbers that’s entirely up to you, but where do you think the numbers on uninsured came from? The same source. “10 million uninsured” is a government stat as are all the numbers I quoted to you in my comments and that still doesn’t change the fact that the dinero ain’t there.

    With all due respect, I think once again we’re just equivocating on the issue. What makes one stat valid and another invalid? It would appear, only our preferences are the final arbiter of truth.

    I’ll go ahead and cross post this if you like.

    Thanks, you’re still the man.

    Aardvark Wiktinstein

  5. Alright dammit, last time.

    First, budget supplementals are not counted in the overall budget because they don’t know how much they will need.

    Second, military spending is disguised. They can count it as spending on “Energy,” but the money is going to the military war machine.

    Third, Jesus was not a Social Darwinist. Your personal philosophy and that of your Savior do not jibe.

    Our personal philosophies stem from our personal experiences. If you want to understand the world JW, you have to understand yourself first. Then things begin to make more sense.

    You know I’m no “Bleeding Heart Enabler,” but it’s so much easier to judge others, and their lives than it is to look at our own, and see how similar we all really are.

    That’s too scary.

    And yes, you should without a doubt crosspost this piece. If this doesn’t spur a discussion (Possibly heated) nothing will.

  6. johnnywingnut on said:

    If I’m not eaten alive, it’ll surprise even me. Eat your vegetables!

    Anyway, your comments are well taken…it’s cool. Here’s more from the mind of Obtusmo:

    As far as YOUR theology old friend, for someone who appears to be agnostic you’re sure beginning to sound like a Bible thumper. I never thought I’d see the day you’d be telling me how I aught to behave, much less that you’d attempt to use the Bible to do it. I have to admit, that last zinger did give me a chuckle, though.

    But seriously, I never said Jesus was an S.D.; that’s all you holmes. It’s a popular misconception of liberals…lol…that “love thy neighbor,” as defined by Jesus, is mandated through the Legislative and Executive power of the United States Government. Such a scenario was never modeled by the King of Kings, who said among other things, that we should render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God, the things that are God’s. Your “WWJD” politic is a nice sentiment and it’s one I share, but it’s actually inconsistent with the God/man who came to liberate us from authoritarian structures, which in socialistic fashion are endeavoring to relieve us of personal responsibility. Evidently, you want to make “love” compulsory. In so doing, you deny autonomy and therefore personal responsibility. That’s NOT love, fairlane; that’s tyranny.

    And you’re only half right on the budget supplementals, holmes. Once those numbers are locked in, they are added to the budget and refigured for the following year. Long and short of it, even with the supplementals to date, social spending is $100 billion above Defense spending, and I suspect, after the new supplementals are added in, social spending will still be the number one cash cow of liberals and neoconservatives in the new year.

    As far as your assertion that the money for Defense is being hidden in some other coffer, well….you got me there. You’ll have to provide a citation or two for that. Although I suppose I could always appeal to the same line of reasoning and assert that the numbers of uninsured are trumped up as well. But that wouldn’t really make much sense, because the federal government is the agency providing the numbers in both cases. So, I guess I’ll just stick to my guns until I see your references.

    Finally, I’m still waiting for a conclusion which follows from the premise of, “unaffordable health care.” Let’s be frank, if health care was “affordable,” we wouldn’t be having this discussion. There’d be no talk of national health care and get this, there would still be a blue million uninsured. The whole scenario just sounds like another attempt to create utopia on the planet. But don’t worry, when it fails (and fails miserably) I won’t say I told you so.

    Peace out

  7. A Few Line Items from our Federal Budget:

    Social Security: $590 Billion

    Defense: $550 Billion

    Medicare: $400 Billion

    Unemployment and Welfare: $370 Billion

    Medicaid: $300 Billion

    A couple of points.

    Medicare serves about 40 million people at a cost of $400 Billion, or $10,000 a year per person.

    Medicaid serves about 60 million people at a cost of $300 Billion, or about $5,000 per person per year.

    The population of the US is 300 million. Thus, the combination of Medicare and Medicaid serves 100 million, or one-third of the US population.

    Taxpayers provide medical coverage for one-third of the population at a cost of $700 Billion a year. Thus, if we covered the entire population, a fair estimate of the cost would be $2.1 TRILLION.

    However, we know the actual cost would run far higher. Why? Because the quality of coverage would approach the Medicare level, at $10,000 per person, rather than the Medicaid level, at $5,000 per person.

    We also know that whenever a service is “free” to the recipient, it is over-used. Therefore, a government-run universal healthcare plan would lead to lots and lots of long lines for service. Business as usual for government services.

  8. The model of responsible government has been perverted into racketeering while bellowing about ‘fighting communism’ provides cover for a ‘system’ that only provides opportunities for businesses to screw the public.
    Capitalism works. Corporatism has a habit of cranking more out of the system than it puts in : which is why there was anti-monopolist legislation once upon a time.
    Health care is an special case. Hypochondriacs aside, nobody with an ounce of sense wants his body monkeyed with just for practice. So why isn’t it a good base of consumerist solutions ?
    It ain’t optional. Emergency medicine doesn’t give you a hell of a lot of shopping power. ‘Insurance’ companies eat their own children. They don’t want to pay ( just like everyone else ) and they pick the best risks and exclude the poor ones – cherrypicking to beat the band.
    Result ? A nightmare in the billings office of medical providers and ineffective or no insurance far too often : especially if a job change is in the mix.
    The state can do a lot of damage control if a person is attended to early and non-essential services are spiked. Think you want to pay for surgery because somebody wants a new set of golf clubs ?
    This ‘discussion’ has gone on for years. Problem is, nobody takes it seriously until they or theirs are nailed by it.
    Guess what. There are damn few perfect specimens out there after a few years are put on the clock.
    For less than the price of partial care that bankrupts people ( most common cause ) everyone can be covered. Don’t give me the nonsense about paying for somebody else’s service. It’s a small sacrifice ( choking back selfishness ) to get something that works.
    All those scare stories about ‘socialized’ medicine? Just the bullshit machine whining away the ‘spin’.How would I know ? Heh. Cause I’m a Canuck.

  9. Come to think of it, you might find an account of what people found different once they had left the U.S. of interest. Try giving the ‘once over’.

  10. Thanks opit. I will.

  11. i will keep this simple
    (call me bleeding heart, i dont care — this is one area i will not compromise)

    health care is a right not a privilege
    no matter the cost

    if it was your child or your mother and you couldnt afford it — you would change your tune when the hospital throws you out because you cannot pay

    having access to health care shouldnt be like shopping at Neiman Marcus

    and the war is draining us — period.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: