Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Reagan was right, and so was Rep. Joe Wilson !



As Ronald Reagan famously once said "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ' I'm from the government and I'm here to help' ". Well, President Barack Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid are pounding on the door and telling us the government is here to help "reform" health care. Ronald Reagan was right, we should all be "terrified".
Now I'm certainly no expert on the health care industry or the insurance industry that enables most of us to afford that care when we need it. And I do agree it's currently too complex and too costly, but anyone who thinks that allowing the government to essentially take over the health care industry is going to increase its efficiency and reduce the cost needs to stop kidding themselves. That is not "reform". Does anyone honestly believe President Obama's claim that we can extend health care insurance to approximately 30 million uninsured people and "reduce" health care costs at the same time? I don't, and I don't think most taxpayers do either.
Ronald Reagan believed in individualism, entrepreneurialism and the power of the American spirit to solve our countries problems and meet its challenges. He also believed in allowing market forces to drive the demand for new products and services, while encouraging competition among private companies to keep down costs to the consumer, making them affordable to more people. He believed that government should play a very minor role in the marketplace and that its main responsibility was to get out of the way of small businesses so they could grow and prosper. He viewed government as more of an impediment to business than a promoter of it.
Barack Obama, on the other hand, believes in the power of government programs and bureaucrats to solve our problems for us, all funded by the U.S. taxpayer of course. Socialism is defined as "a system of ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution by the society or the community rather than by private individuals, with all members of the society or community sharing in the work and the products."
Barack Obama's plan is government run health care or "socialized medicine". There is no way private health insurance will survive in competition with a "public option", and if it is approved, and President Obama will have gotten the "single-payer" health care system he has said he favors.
This is where "we the people" need to step in and tell our elected representatives in Congress how we feel. We need to research, debate and discuss ideas on real reform, and voice our opinions. We should demand that Congress listen to us and our ideas on reform, not just allow the liberal congressional leadership and the President to take-over our health care.
And as one of my blue-collar co-workers at Ford said to me; If Congress is so confident in the quality of care and cost savings of the "public option" coverage they are advocating for the rest of America, why aren't they willing to give up their current coverage and join us?

33 comments:

  1. Now will they take back all the things they said about Joe? I think the Republicans need to speekout more like Joe did. It looks like the Republican are finding their place among the conservative voice of our country. If they don't keep coming over to the conservative way then a third party will most likely force them into submision. But that would take one more election and this country can't take much more of this liberal abuse on our freedoms. But it was Carter the idiot that gaver us Reagan. I would love to see another liberal Democrat become a conservative like Reagan did.

    ReplyDelete
  2. They never, ever take anything back, just as they never even review what they've done or look ahead to try to see unintended consequences of what they're try to do.

    By the way Chris, I too followed Dale's "science and Christianity" blog, I actually went to his class!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brian, This is not an attack but you touched something that I believe many (maybe you?) are missing in this whole debacle yet is extremely important to the issue;

    "Does anyone honestly believe President Obama's claim that we can extend health care insurance to approximately 30 million uninsured people and "reduce" health care costs at the same time?"

    Now if that were the goal as you correctly stated from the get-go by Obama '30 +/- 16 million out of 300 million',well ok then,our taxes at the current level would indeed cover them (medicaid) so why the need for their current plan, when again as you state nobody disagrees on cost containment.

    But here inlies the lie so to speak. It has gone from the 'feel-good' "cover the non-covered" to an entirely different scope; that of 'single-payer, Nationalized,government-run healthcare'.

    Now don't feel attacked here.I am sure you agree. I am just simply saying that when stating the conservative arguement,it be stated as it is with all the facts. When explaining liberal policies to liberals in a conservative way they might just get it.

    There are people that still think this is about what is really factually amounting to as little as 15 million Americans when it is really about 299,999,346 +/- besides congress.

    ReplyDelete
  4. p.s.: a caveat here, when I said;

    "When explaining liberal policies to liberals in a conservative way they might just get it".

    I was speaking in terms of actual voters i.e,co-workers,Family,neighbors and alike not party activists or liberal agitators so Bruce forget it before you start.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Chris,
    I'm not sure I get your point, so let me just say this; I agree that Obama's goal is REALLY a government take-over of health care (single-payer).
    The "help the uninsured" line is pure B.S., if they want real reform to lower the cost so more people can afford health care, I'm in !
    But they don't. The Lib's want the government to CONTROL health care. I'm now convinced that Barack Hussein Obama is a Socialist, and wants nothing less than to turn this country into a Socialist state !
    Romney in 2012 !

    ReplyDelete
  6. The point is you only say 30 million which is where the healthcare debate started and is still the democrat talking point,when in FACT they are really talking 300,000,000 i.e; ALL AMERICANS.

    When you frame the arguement in real terms and numbers the cost containment line goes out the window.

    Anyone (even liberals) that has basic math skills can figure out the cost difference between covering 30M as opposed to 300,000,000M.

    So when discussing this idiotic, socialist take-over of the health industry just use the real numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  7. p.s., It took you a long time to figure out he is a socialist? His whole campaign spelled it out.

    ReplyDelete
  8. p.p.s.; I just noticed your Romney line.

    Just a reminder here, research Romneycare in Massachusetts and see what he liked and instituted as governor and how well it is working out ?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Good 'ol Christopher, I can always count on you to herd me back to the far right if I start sounding like I might stray towards the middle ...
    So you're going to rule out Romney ... for who, Ron Paul ? Why do some of you Libertarian leaning Republicans insist on attacking the Republicans who you consider too "moderate" when you should be spending your time going after the leftists, socialists and extreme liberals who are destroying this country ?

    Lefties love guys like you Christopher. They know you will try to divide the Republican party and keep it fighting other conservatives rather than focusing on them. Bruce "the Lurking Lefty" should be popping up any minute to cheer you on !
    I think Romney Care was a disaster, just like Obama-care will be, but I don't think Romney would suggest Obama-care is good for the country. What he may have tried as governor of Liberal Massachusetts is not necessarily what he would want to do as President.

    ReplyDelete
  10. O.K. I see your point now about how the Lib's have tried to move the debate from the 30 million uninsured to now be the 300 million people in the U.S.
    Sure, Obama is slick. I did say he is a Socialist attempting a government takeover, NOT "REAL REFORM" ! Relax, we're on the same side here ...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Geez calm down. I did not rule out anyone? I am not "Libertarian-leaning" ,,lol,,you are as well as the entire RNC. Ron Paul????? Not! So I guess I can in fact rule him out,,lol.

    If Bruce wants to cheer me on in destroying his objective so be it,stupid on his part,but so be it. You on the other hand getting upset by me helping your arguement is self-defeating.

    I find it amusing when you call Conservatives "far-right", by doing that you confirm you are a moderate.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thinking more on who should run in 2012, I believe a good candidate would be Rep. Mike Pence (R-ID). What say you on that?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey Christopher, I LOVE to debate and discuss politics, and I certainly don't mind someone disagreeing with me.

    As far as Mitt for President in 2012 ... I think he's one of the best candidates out there. Sure, I like Mike Pence, but c'mon Christopher, do you REALLY think he's "electable" at this point ? His name recognition is about 2% ...

    Romney is well known, battle tested, well liked and a great leader. He was elected Governor in Massachusetts, which tells you he can attract Moderates and Independents votes (that's a good thing Christopher ...) Pence is doing a good job in the House, we need more Congressmen and Women like him.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Great! It seemed you had some thin-skin there buddy? Look, I like Romney but the problem now is his history on healthcare which is sure to be brought up BIG TIME this cycle.

    As far as name recognition goes,,ummmm,,Obama had like 1% and where does he sit now? Plus the electorate is sic and tired of "recognizable" names as they are considered "career politicians" be they good ones or bad. So if the RNC is listening to conservatives,run one like Pence and back him with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    ReplyDelete
  15. I mean really,the RNC must change it's ways. They backed (both State and National Republican Party) Scozzavava (sp?) in NY-23 ? She then dropped-out and backed the liberal thereby the only Conservative on the ballot lost. And this was done with the blessing of all people Newt Gingrich ? This is in no way, shape or form to get conservatives elected.

    ReplyDelete
  16. NY 23 could have been avoided if NY had primaries instead of the party picking the candidate, so that was kind of an unusual case.
    I'm not saying name recognition is the top priority, but it is worth alot.
    More importantly, Mitt is well liked and well respected. Bottom line ... He's electable.
    I like him and will "probably" support him. (I like to "pick a horse" early in the race.)I don't see anyone else emerging that will be a front-runner ... We need to get behind our nominee early and support the conservative agenda as an alternative to Obama's ( and Reid and Pelosi's ) Socialism.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Here again is a dilemema with Romney and moderates with history being the teacher. I myself (a Conservative) picked Romney (moderate,but some Con.) over McCain (definate moderate) in the last primary yet McCain won the nomination. McCain was never going to win against anyone in the National contest proving moderates picked the loser and the winner being Obama and America losing along the way. (see Bob Dole/Bill Clinton).

    Then 8 years before that McCain lost to Bush 43 and in comparison they looked the same (moderate, but McCain being stronger Con.) with both having strong name recognition and McCain having way more expierence than Bush.
    Here again,the moderates prevailed yet we saw spending increases like no other Republican before.

    Now I venture to say that in both instances the RNC (moderates) did pick the nominees using cash as their proxy as I alluded to earlier in NY-23. But now you say you do not like it and I agree on that, but then you should do as I have done, tell the RNC not to take sides in the primary process and let the chips fall where they may.

    Everyone says "contact your politicans" which should be done,but do not limit your contacts to them alone, contact the National party as well to send them a strong message.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We need to nudge the left,right and center to the right.We need to praise those that come closer to the right.If we tell them they didn't come far enough to the right so they are not welcome in the conservative club then we will go nowhere. Baby steps

    ReplyDelete
  19. Chris, i want you, brian and Christopher to welcome with open arms the Log Cabin republicans. Your big top needs them...lol..

    As for national candidates it hink Pawlenty and Jindal should be at the top of the pack. Mitt's old news and I heart Huckabee is never going to get the hard right after that dude killed those folks.

    Its funny how you guys are pushing the revivalist movement of the right, when it was the right and your electoral choices that tried to kill the right. Had you picked McCain in 2000, you would have had a better leader in office after 9/11 and things would be different today.

    So if Carter gacve us Reagan, then Bush gave us Obama. The blame lies on yourselves.

    Christopher, Pence is like another past canidate who deserved better, Tommy Thompson. Ole Tom couldn't get anyone interested in him, despite good qualifications and outstanding leadership abilities. He withered on the vine in 2000 and 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  20. January 2, 2010 10:27 AM JoeC said..."if Carter gave us Reagan, then Bush gave us Obama".

    Well Joe, it looks like Obama and Pelosi are going to give us a Republican Congress in 2010 and a good Conservative President in 2012 and teach Democrats a valuable lesson; Don't elect Socialist/Liberals to lead your party, or you will quickly lose the majority once voters see how you govern !

    ReplyDelete
  21. I agree that two can play the 'nudge' game. We need to quit being the "Party of No" and make strides toward bringing our country back to where it needs to be. "Conservatism" isn't adequate to describe what needs to be done, as it implies we just want to keep things as they are. The DNC and GOP have taken our country to the edge of the cliff. I think we should call our active, goal-oriented plan "Progressive Conservatism", because we are eyeing progress toward prosperity.

    ReplyDelete
  22. It was the left that distroyed and are still distroying this country. For the past 40 years the liberals have been nudging us into a farther left culture. This is what we get from these hippies that are running this country into the ground.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Don't forget it was the media that pushed for John McCain and Barack Obama. Both of which are liberal for their party. I say we conservative pick the next President for a change. Don't forget it was Bush's liberal actions that Americans didn't like. They didn't like his liberal spending and TARP. But it looks like TARP did a better job then the Stimulus bill did. It looks like the health care reform bill is a lot like the stimulus bill. It gives our money to those States that go in lock and step with the liberal agenda and it doesn't fix the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Chris,

    On that last post of yours at 10:05 AM I agree to the fullest extent !

    ReplyDelete
  25. Big Chris we are the Progessive Conservatives. And John called it right when he coined the term 'Liberal Al Queda'.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'm all for conservative progress in this country!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Conservative progress is an oxymoron. Conservatives don't want anything to do with progress. Progress implies moving forward and all conservatives want to do is move backward.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Please read and act, only takes a minute!

    On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new government-run health plan. It took me less than a minute to sign up to require our congressmen and senators to drink at the same trough! Three cheers for Congressman John Fleming of Louisiana ! Congressman John Fleming ( Louisiana physician) has proposed an amendment that would require congressmen and senators to take the same healthcare plan they force on us (under proposed legislation they are curiously exempt).

    Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go on his Website and sign his petition (very simple - just first, last and email). I have immediately done just that at:


    http://fleming.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=55&sectiontree=29,55


    Please urge as many people as you can to do the same! If Congress forces this on the American people, the Congressmen should have to accept the same level of health care for themselves and their families. To do otherwise is the height of hypocrisy! Please pass this on!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Bruce "Epic" FAILk said: "Conservative progress is an oxymoron. Conservatives don't want anything to do with progress. Progress implies moving forward and all conservatives want to do is move backward."

    FAILk, YOU liberals are the ones who want to move us back to the horse-and-buggy days when there was no "man-made green-house gasses" ... except you FAILk to understand there was all that methane pollution from all the horses, both pooping and dying in the streets. Something like 200x's more of a green-house gas than CO2.

    By the way FAILk, try to generate MORE green-house gasses, because it appears to me we are sliding into that next ice-age that you alarmists were warning us about back in the 70's. Only four decades later than predicted, but here it is, and now we had better start producing some epic amounts of green-house gasses if we are going to keep this planet we call home warm enough to sustain life! So get out there and POLLUTE BABY!! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA

    And if socialism and communism is "moving forward", then I'm proud to be called a conservative. What is it about socialism and communism that you love so much Bruce? I don't get it. It's an utter failure everywhere it is implemented, and it's not because it has been implemented incorrectly. It's because it is a total failure of a system. Except in your little fantasy world. Unfortunately we are living in the world of "reality".

    ReplyDelete
  30. Chris - I signed that a while ago, but the Hypocrats in Congress would never accept the crap ObummerCare that they will force on us, the unwashed masses.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Little by little we will get our way. Just look at how little the liberals are blogging now. They can't keep up with the conservative movement as there are way too many of us. And when we take back our country,and we will, we need to undo what these liberals have done. And we need to put the liberals decades from ever doing such a thing ever again. You liberals better circle your wagens because we are come hard and strong and in greater numbers then you have ever seen. You liberals will have just tasted success with Obama and Congress and we will come and take it right away from you. And by the time you liberals wake up from your drunken power frenzy we will have taken back both houses of Congress and then you can blame the Republicans in power all you want as that card will have been old and used up.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Mr. President ... You Lie !http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2010/01/the_real_barack_obama_1.html

    ReplyDelete