How could anyone not like this so-called healthcare bill the House has passed? Almost magically, it reduces the deficit by increasing spending by about a trillion dollars. This is similar to how the stimulus package has decreased both the deficit and unemployment. If you liked the stimulus package and TARP, you’ll love this so-called healthcare bill.
I especially like the part about health insurance providers being required to cover pre-existing conditions. That’s because I don’t own an insurance company. Whether you like them or not, the reason insurers either don’t cover pre-existing conditions, or have a waiting period before they do, is that it’s a losing proposition. For example, I had a heart attack and my kidneys failed, requiring me to go on dialysis. The amount my insurance company pays each month is considerably larger than my premium amount. If this had happened before I had insurance, it would have understandably been difficult, or very expensive, to find a company willing to take on that burden.
As a consumer, I like the idea, however. I think this practice should be extended to all types of insurance. I can avoid paying car insurance until I have an accident. I’ll get extended warranties only after something goes wrong with the equipment. When someone in the family dies, such as an uncle, I can take out a life insurance policy on him and collect a lot of money. If my house catches on fire, I can take out a policy and the insurance company will have to pay the damages. No longer can life insurance premiums go up due to increasing age. All it takes is for idiots in congress, who know nothing about business and making profits, to declare it so.
I remember a family in South Carolina that bought a new trailer and had it moved to its property. The next day a tornado came through and completely destroyed the trailer. A lady from the family said they had planned on getting insurance that day. The insurance company had this silly idea that they should have purchased the insurance before the home was destroyed, demonstrating how inhuman insurers can be.
Anyway, it’s easy to see that, by requiring insurers to cover pre-existing conditions, health insurance for all Americans will be much cheaper. Also, people on Medicare will see improved benefits after 500 billion dollars is stripped from the already insolvent program. I guess the problem is that I know so much less about math than the Democrats in congress. They never taught us about health insurance in an engineering college.
The worst part of this bill, however, is the mandate that everyone must buy health insurance, a mandate that will be enforced by the IRS. This will create jobs, because 17,000 new IRS agents must be hired. Have I mentioned that this is supposed to be a free country? That doesn’t mean free health care, but it should mean freedom from buying it unless an individual wants it.
Does it not occur to people that the government gets its money from the people, so it’s impossible to give back more in benefits than it takes in? This doesn’t require much heavy thinking to figure it out. Radicals are always demanding things from the government. They demand free college educations, free health care, and whatever else they think they lack but should have. None of this is guaranteed, and should not be guaranteed, by the Constitution.
The real problem here is that none of this is really about improving health insurance coverage for anyone, or about making it cheaper. It’s about transforming the United States to a socialist, perhaps even communist, form of government.
The president and the Democrats have continually demonized insurance providers without explaining why health insurance costs are rising. Much of it is due to government regulation, for example, preventing individuals from buying insurance across state lines, and failure to pass tort reform laws. Doctors and hospitals must pass the cost of attorney’s fees and judgments to the consumer, and insurance providers must take in enough money to satisfy these increased costs. Demonizing the insurance industry is an attempt to create a false sense of oppression among the populace. The people didn’t buy the rhetoric this time, however, with a majority not wanting this bill to be passed. That didn’t stop the Democrats and the president from shoving this bill through anyway.
Many of us attempted to warn others about the very real dangers of electing Obama, a Marxist, as president. He has aligned himself with radicals since his teen years. He still surrounds himself with those of the same ilk. So how did he manage to get elected?
Part of it was ACORN and their illegal voting practices, and part was capturing a majority of the black vote, but the biggest factor was a result of Democrats in some states crossing party lines and voting for John McCain in the primaries. They knew McCain to be a RINO (Republican in name only) and knew that many conservatives would not vote for him, just to “teach the party a lesson.” Well, it’s a lesson the country can ill afford.
This administration has trampled the Constitution by ruling by decree, just as in countries run by dictators. When congress won’t bow to the wishes of the president, he issues Executive Orders. Even before the healthcare bill, the federal government interfered in commerce, bailing out banks and businesses and even telling auto makers how much they can pay certain employees.
The ACLU persists in its attempts to secularize America, and in many cases, the liberal judges on the Supreme Court have played the game. They scratched their collective heads back in 1973 and decided that, because they couldn’t say for sure exactly when life begins, states could not outlaw the killing of babies by abortion. Most sane individuals would’ve thought the opposite, in the absence of proof. In many instances, they have decreed that public displays of, for example, the Ten Commandments, violate the so-called Establishment clause. The full text of the First Amendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
It’s difficult for me to understand how, if Congress has passed no law respecting an establishment of religion, the First Amendment has been violated? On the other hand, the Supreme Court has, for all practical purposes, enacted laws which prohibit the free exercise of religion, in a sense. Enacting laws is the sole responsibility of Congress, along with the president, not the Supreme Court. I’m tired of the government catering to the whims of some whiney individual who thinks differently than most people. If school prayer, or an invocation, offends someone, but doesn’t offend most others involved, the ruling should be for the majority, not the nutcase.
If a bull knew about the sword hidden behind the matador’s cape, it would never charge the cape. Some on the left of the political spectrum still believe that people warning about the restructuring of America and the destruction of its freedoms are conspiracy theorists. It just might be that they just want to see what’s really hidden behind the cape.
[...] Free or Freedom « A Site for Shore Eyes [...]