The "Right" of Universal Health Care

Just sitting here ... pondering the Left's assertion that people have the "right" to universal health care. You know what bugs me about that assertion? It is that this "right" implicitly defines my obligation to pay for someone else's health and lifestyle choices.

Let's say that you are the average White Trash Democrat voter living in some trailer in ... pick a state .. Rhode Island. You vote Democrat 'cause you know that Republicans would have your ass off of welfare and hunting a job tomorrow, benefits to be cut off as soon as possible ... you know, Republicans might force you to be responsible for yourself. So in your Democratic White Trash squalor, you make life decisions: Cheetohs or Doritos? A gallon or two of high fructose corn syrup soda to wash them down ... then to watch Oprah or wrestling? And you are 350 pounds and can only buy clothes at Walmart (which is the only purveyor of quad-X clothing in short sizes), and show signs of type 2 diabetes.

So you able on down to Oba-hospital for some Pelosi-care: the whole shooting match to get you feeling a might better 'cause you get these shooting pains.

Who pays?

Well, certainly it won't be Cheetoh-kid. It will be you and me. WE will be paying for the decisions made by people we don't know, can't elect or throw out of office, can't influence and can't stop. In effect, Cheetoh-kid might as well be taking money directly out of my pocket to support his obesity and indolence.

And so it goes ... Mr. Guatemala who crawled under the wire bringing his wife and ten kids, Mr. Drug dealer who sells drugs that lead to overdoses and hepatitis, Ms. Have Eight Kids to maximize social benefits. These are decisions made by others affecting health care for which we will have to pay. It is so clearly NOT about helping to pay only for illnesses that are beyond the control of the individual stricken. It is a subsidy for the criminal, the indolent, the ignorant ... voters all likely to vote Democrat. And that, my friends, is a crime.

You know, Ms. Obese Stouffer's eater? I don't think that I should pay a dime for your "mobility scooter." Your Lipitor. Your home-assistance because you can't physically roll into the tub and then get back out again. Not a dime. You are not crippled, you are fat because you eat too much. You are unemployed because there is virtually no job for which you are suited -- barring a phone solicitation gig which does not require you to move.

Think I am kidding? Try going to Walmart at 11pm ANY night of the week at ANY location in the US of A (though Pittsburgh at that time was an eye-opener when we had to get some underwear because the airlines had lost ours -- more yards of flesh squeezed into polyester than is decent to relate). Reality is stranger than fiction. And in 100 years people will wonder what the hell we were thinking.

Random thoughts ...

Here's some ideas that make one nauseous.

Each and every one of Obama's cash for clunkers really cost us $24,000. How do I get to that number? If you take all the cars that were sold and for which $4,000 was forked over that were going to be replaced within the 12 months following and removed them from the clunker pool -- i.e., they did not "stimulate" purchases, only moved inevitable ones forwards, then take the billions and allot them to the remaining cars (about 124,000 according to Edmunds), you get about $24k per car. How do I know what number was going to be replaced anyway within the 12 months? From the owners themselves who have been polled numerous times. And why would they lie ... they were getting a government gift?!!

Gee, thanks Barry-O for stimulating those sphincters over at GMC. And, of course, GNP for the third quarter was boosted by 1.7%, showing that we are "out of the recession." That makes the Dems look good, and gets everyone into the psychological position to start lending and spending again ... and it is psychology ... consumer confidence that will actually make it start again. But what happens when the 4th quarter rolls around and the stimulus crap rolls off? We get a "W" recession. The reality, of course, is that we are still in one and unemployment continues to rise. But these cretins in DC and the liberal press choose to look at it differently: a con, if there ever was one.

What else is bugging me? Hmmm. How about a 1990 page health care bill that is about to unload another couple of trillion dollars of debt. Under Bush, the deficit was going to be staggering ... as the Dems pointed out constantly. $400 billion. But under Obama, in the space of one year, it became $1.4 trillion. More deficit than all the Presidents in the history of the U.S. have been able to amass combined. In one year. Change? Is that the frikking change that the left wants? To see us all in the poor house??????

How about H1N1 ... and the complete bungling of this by Obama. Sure it started under Bush, but Obama totally screwed the pooch on this: there is no damn vaccine available, even for high risk individuals. I heard three doctors in Boston on the radio today complaining that they have been completely unable to locate ANY for themselves and their own families, let alone their patients. The CDC knew that this was bad as soon as it showed its ugly head last year. And yet ... prisoners in penitentiaries are getting vaccinated ... but my kids can't. ARE WE TOTALLY OUT OF OUR MINDS? Mr. President, the buck stops on your desk. Man up. If you can.

Too funny.

Generally, Obama thinks he can do whatever he likes. I mean, he's President for goodness sake.

But he has had over 24 rounds of golf ... and only just a few rounds ago did he decide to invite a woman to golf with him. And ... more to the point ... he has never invited any women to play hoops with him and his homies (some Congressmen and staffers).

Well, it turns out that there are women's organizations that keep tabs on these things. Why anyone should waste their time counting and reporting on Obama's golf rounds seems ... well, petty. And if it was a Republican outfit doing that, we'd no doubt hear about it. But the interesting thing here is that these bean-counters are hyper feminists, staunch supporters of the far left. The network that broke this and raked Obama over the coals was MSNBC (complete lefty-loonie types).

Huh?

What does this mean? It means that these people are expecting Obama to walk the walk, and not just talk the talk. Up until now, anyone identified with the left could pay lip-service to the faithful O-bots, Lenin's useful idiots. And they received cabinet posts and czarships in return ... but nobody dared question the Messiah.

Is it possible that somewhere some liberal-extremist has suddenly twigged to the fact that Obama's administration is politics as usual -- Chicago/left brand? And Barry is another "guy?" Even more delicious, Obama is suddenly shocked that he can't have that cake and eat it too? That someone looked behind the curtain of Oz-bama and the dude with the mask is also doing the levers, too?

It is simply too tasty that Obama is busted because he won't let the girls play hoops too. I actually feel sorry for him ... but when you keep pet tarantulas for political support, you might get bitten.

Hypocrites or just caught in insoluble puzzle?

Bono is a hypocrite. This one is pretty simple: you fly around the world on private jets, engage limos and support an entourage ... to get the message out for environmental consciousness and peace. That is crazy on the face of it.

But so is Obama: he likes to fly into cities to make speeches and raise funds for friends (like Duval Putrid in Massachusetts) costing the locals millions of dollars each time. In Obama's most recent Boston gig, the support is estimated as having cost over $2 million. The goal? A speech at MIT and a fund raiser for Duval Patrick at the Hyatt -- $6,000 per person for the meet and greet which did NOT sell out. I'll bet the "stupid" Cambridge Police Department was just crazy about Obama's visit.

So, with all the hoopla, Patrick raised less than $1 million, but the whole charade cost the state $2 million? The speech at MIT? Only an idiot would fail to see this as a cover to support his Chicago homie, Doofus Putrid. Why not just write his campaign the check next time? And how much did the affair cost in terms of carbon footprint? How can you ask the American people to cut down -- forgo their machines -- if the President is part of the problem?

Which leads me to the "puzzle." People identifying with the Green movement are also, typically pet lovers ... there are always lots of dogs around to show how much these people love animals and the environment. It sort of fits in a most visceral and emotional level. But studies have just come out showing that the average mid-sized dog -- say a border collie -- is responsible for a carbon footprint equal to that of a mid-sized SUV.

"Robert and Brenda Vale said in their new book, "Time To Eat The Dog: The Real Guide To Sustainable Living," that a medium-sized dog eats about 362 pounds of meat and 209 pounds of cereal each year, with 43 square miles of land needed to create just 2.2 pounds of dog food cereal, Sky News reported Friday.

The Vales calculate the carbon footprint of a medium-sized dog as 2.08 acres, more than twice the 1.01 acres needed to create enough energy to build a Toyota Land Cruiser. However, the pair said the average driver travels about 12,000 miles a year, making the carbon footprint of the Toyota and the dog roughly equivalent."

Even if this is debatable -- that is, the actual numbers may be smaller -- the point is clear and unequivocal.

I am not suggesting that mankind abandon their closest ally for the past 100,000 years, far from it. If you (Enviro-weenies) want to place this burden on the Earth, then you should be entitled to it. But in the same way you want to tax my SUV, I should be able to tax dog food: an idle SUV doesn't make much footprint, but running it does ... just like feeding a dog. I wonder how many of the hairy-Earth-tree-hugging population would keep their pets if they had to fork over the same intended environmental taxes as the hated Expedition driver? I am all for taxing both of them!!

Our church is doing a walk for a sister church in Honduras ... and the congregation often sends mission trips there. Let's consider this in the light of the carbon game: how much should this really cost the missionaries? Do we really need to fly to Honduras to work? Would it not be better to simply send them the money? Or is it really about assuaging our conscience? Could we not achieve the same by helping out in Kentucky someplace? Actually, in Boston we have our own slums. So couldn't we work there instead and take the "T" to our mission? Sure it doesn't quite have the allure of having done a foreign mission trip, but carbon-wise it sure makes more sense, not to mention the money wasted on air fare.

Then I got to thinking ... but if we sailed over there wouldn't that work out better? No, because we'd have to stock the food, and who could afford the time for the trip. Not to mention the boat, the upkeep, etc. No, it seems pretty clear that environmentally responsible charity ... begins at home.

Media diservice

Nobel farce -- Fox

I won't go into the Nobel prize farce: it is just too ridiculous for words. And everyone knows it, except, apparently, five Norwegians drunk somewhere in Oslo.

So let's look at another farce instead. Obama's press corps have now decided to attack Fox as a wing of the Republican Party:

"What I think is fair to say about Fox -- and certainly it's the way we view it -- is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party," said Anita Dunn, White House communications director, on CNN. "They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."

Hmmm. Lemme see .... Fox is propaganda, and CNN's Wolf Blitzer is fair and balanced. Larry "Leftie" King isn't in the Liberal tank? Bill Bennet? Larry CARVILLE? Jon Roberts? I could list the whole stinking lot of them. Let's get this straight!

In the final 6 weeks of the last election, 40% of Fox stories on Obama were negative. Fox did the same for McCain, 40% negative. CNN, by contrast was 39% negative on Obama and 61% negative on McCain. Hardly an organization to be held up as fair and balanced. And CNN were the best of the left-wing TV news media. MSNBC was 19% negative on Obama and 73% negative on McCain. That is not reporting, that is assassination. And yet, this shrill cry-baby moron Dunn thinks Fox is unfair. Notice which network Obama did not appear on during his latest Sunday talk-spree? 5 networks in the tank throwing softballs to the POTUS, and Fox is shut out. Chris Wallace is too threatening: might he actually ask a pointed question, or would that be "racist?"

FOX at least airs the Liberal view, even if it is only to show how absurd it is -- and liberals are on-air to try and defend the positions. No other television network even attempts debate: they broadcast pure socialist propaganda, without even tipping their hats to truth.

Is it any wonder that the American public (which, by and large, does not read -- and if they did, it would still be propaganda of yet a more vitriolic socialist brand) fails to understand the monumental enema which it is the process of receiving, courtesy of Reid, Pelosi and Barry-O?

The dollar is about to go into the tank, oil prices will be denominated in yuan/riyals, Iran about to spark a nuke, Israel about to zap some Persian carpet, Russia turn off the spigot on the gas again for a cold winter ... health care about to screw us all .... and Dunn (meaning Rahm Escrew-yall and Barry-O) complains that Fox is right wing?

Is this some sort of confidence trick? Some sleight of hand to take our eyes off of the ball? I wonder if New Zealand is accepting lawyers about now?

Jsut a quick note....

Obama is a fool. There, I've said it. What a berk (U.K. lingo for idiot) to be manipulated to embark on the fool's errand to the IOC to beg Chicago's chances. Think of all the O-bots that stood to make out like George Soros on their investments in now-worthless Chicago real estate. A grand pay-back for the faithful of the most corrupt major city in the US ... even worse than Boston and New Orleans.

So now he looks like a complete and utter panty-waist ... did he honestly think that he could waltz in there and say, "I'm here! Vote for my people! See? I am such a good guy, and exactly what y'all wanted!!! I de-missiled Eastern Europe!! I played nice with Putin (who still has his pants at the cleaners because he watched the IOC vote). Heck, Putin should buy a dry cleaners given all the times that I am reliably informed that he has pissed his pants laughing at our "First Moron."

And he thinks that he can twist the arms of some Republicans to go along with another version of health care. He must be crazy, unless, of course, he has negatives/2GB memory chips showing beastiality performed by the GOP'ers. Otherwise, I'd think the GOP would rather side with Pol Pot in terms of their next election prospects.

So, while Barry-O meanders around the world pimping for his friends and making half-hearted attempts to "fix" our economy (yeah, the other meaning of "fix" is probably in), China, Japan, Russia and the Gulf Arabs are planning to ditch the dollar as an oil currency. The final stamp on the demise of America as a power. Believe me ... this is coming.

Oh, yes, I forget: Barry-O decided that he would ditch the Dalai Lama to show China what a good guy he is. Sounds like one of his patented tail-between-the-legs-mongrel-cur I wanna be loved moves. (And Putin calls for another pair of pants).

Two things strike me about this: (1) if Obama thinks that the Chinese will "like us" more because of this, he is so out of touch that my head starts to spin -- it is a sign of weakness, not a sign of cooperation rising to a new level; and (2) where are all the lefties in this country and why are they not totally berserk about the abandonment of one of their most sacred causes? How come the New York Times / CNN / MSNBC etc., are not wailing and rending their shirts in anguish? This is Tibet, folks!! Free Tibet!!! Free the Gerbils!! Uh ... oh yeah, that guy only likes Gerbils and Gerbs are from Ulan Bator, not Lhasa, anyway.

Tibet is a serious thorn in the Chinese side and by caving in to Chinese bullying, we have just sent the message world-wide that we will stand by while repressive regimes engage in a little genocide, a little cultural extermination. Of course, Obama likes Chavez and Castro. He admires the Chinese (apparently), tolerates Russian imperialism and seems content to let Iran rid the world of Israel -- no need to mention the pesky truth that Russians have been helping the Iranians get their nuclear treasure chest in order. If you remove your bargaining chips unilaterally, you make the world less safe.

And this is the defender of the free?