Here is an image of the house healthcare bill.
How can anyone possibly think such a massive amount of legislation will be beneficial. However those on the left seem to think such massive legislation will be good.
An example of coercion if Obamacare is passed.
Note several of my readers on the left support this kind of coercion.
The fact that the profit margins of health insurance companies are not very large has been under reported. This is surprising given that a major justification for universal health care is to save money by eliminating the profit motive. An AP report finds:
Quick quiz: What do these enterprises have in common? Farm and construction machinery, Tupperware, the railroads, Hershey sweets, Yum food brands and Yahoo? Answer: They’re all more profitable than the health insurance industry. In the health care debate, Democrats and their allies have gone after insurance companies as rapacious profiteers making “immoral” and “obscene” returns while “the bodies pile up.”
Ledgers tell a different reality. Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That’s anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.
Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.
In many ways, this is a direct repudiation of the major justification given for universal health care and yet its only now being reported. But lets flip it, and lets say that heath insurance companies profits were some of the highest of all industries. Do you think the press would only now, nine months after the first push for universal healthcare, report on it. I suspect had insurance companies had much larger profit margins we would of heard about it right from the very beginning.
Such differential treatment, if true, is called bias. I wonder if the Obama administration is going to declare all the news organization that failed to report a major contradiction to his justification for healthcare non news organizations. I won’t hold my breath.
Mike Pence has my vote!
Senate democrats just passed some discriminatory legislation.
The Senate passed groundbreaking legislation Thursday that would make it a federal crime to assault an individual because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.
On what grounds does a liberal argue against treating a minority group differently in terms of marriage when they support legislation that treats minorities different when physically assaulted. In regards to creating exclusionary legislation that specifically targets minority groups liberals and conservatives are the same. They don’t want to treat minorities equally.
WW2 Veteran was asked about his position on same sex marriage:
“Do you believe in equal, equality for gay and lesbian people?” I was pretty surprised to be asked a question like that. It made no sense to me. Finally I asked her, “What do you think our boys fought for at Omaha Beach?” I haven’t seen much, so much blood and guts, so much suffering, much sacrifice. For what? For freedom and equality. These are the values that give America a great nation, one worth dying for.
But whats surprising is that the Obama administration seems to have no idea that other stations like CNN also has their side. I mean CNN fact checked a SNL skit that was poking fun at the administration. They seriously fact checked it.
In many ways this current administration feels like amateur hour. Complaining about the only major media organization that isn’t sympathetic to your views reeks of petulant little kid. Given that our current president came into the office with absolutely no executive experience we really shouldn’t be surprised.
The Onion is way better at satire than the Daily Show mostly because they are not bias.
Micahel Wong lays out a compelling argument for the Star Trek Federation being Communist. Here’s his conclusion:
You simply can’t have unbridled freedom and strong government at the same time, because one acts directly against the other. The Federation claims to offer virtually unlimited personal freedom to every citizen, but no one ever tests this claim. Billions of people live quiet, spartan, communist lifestyles. They never covet wealth, they never go ripping through space in a personal vehicle, they never expect compensation for their achievements, they never challenge the government with rebellious propaganda, they never push the envelope by producing offensive art, they never accumulate private arsenals … in short, they never do anything to test the limits of their freedom. Supposedly, they have all the benefits of a strong government, without any of the negatives.
In real life, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Give people freedom and they’ll abuse it. Give the government more power and it will abuse it. I’ve been accused of cynicism for saying these things, but I have yet to see anyone produce a shred of evidence to prove that this isn’t true. The balance between social stability and individual freedom is one that all societies must walk very carefully; you can’t simply have both. In my opinion, the only way to produce the Federation’s smiley-faced corps of perfectly well-behaved citizens is to push that balance to the left. All the way left.
