Following Me Around Like the Plague

Socialism, that is…

I’ve often laughed derisively when people have asked me if I missed my native country or had ever considered maybe going back one day. The way things are going with the commie Jugeared freak and his Congressional enablers at least I won’t have to face that silly question in the future, because it looks like Eunuchistan is coming to live with us, courtesy of socialist pigs in DC, RINO girly-men (but I repeat myself) and a voting populace that should never be allowed to cast a ballot outside of American Idol.

So the resident just got done, with the help of a bunch of Senate RINOs with less balls than a colony of flatworms, throwing/shoving/forcing a trillion-dollar bill to be paid by your great-great-grandchildren’s great-grandchildren down our throats, but that’s only the beginning. Next, another $600+ billion to finance, you morons kept asking for it, nationalized Hell-care.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama’s first budget will seek $634 billion over 10 years as a down payment on health care reform — a little more than half what it may ultimately cost to provide every American with medical coverage.

Wonderful!

Not only do we get to pile even more funds we don’t have on top of the unfunded nightmare that will be a curse upon our descendants for about 50 generations, in return we get to enjoy all of the quality care that the British NHS is famous for.

Hooray, and thanks a pants-load, “52”ers.

Waiting lines that stretch out over decades, sub-par care that is as likely to kill you as make you better along with “hospitals” so unhygienic that they make microbiology cultures look positively yummy by comparison. If there were any adherence to safety regulations over there, there’d be Biohazard Level 4 signs all over the place, and I’m only talking about their ORs.

I can’t hardly wait.

92 comments

  1. 1
    LC Gunsniper says:

    What the communist health care idjits don’t realize is that it won’t guarantee care in the least. All they’ll achieve is a system even more bureaucratic than the present system, a system that will set it’s own criteria in doling out care and will not be answerable to it’s “customers”. And when the guvmint denies you treatment you can’t sue them like you can an insurance company.

  2. 2
    LC Gonzman says:

    Actually, it’s not socialism since it doesn’t take away private property. More Fascism, because it tells you what to do with it.

    Not that it’s any better, but….

  3. 3

    Well, his lovely wife did shout at us and tell us that Barrack wouldn’t let us go on living the life we had gotten used to. Maybe they’re hoping that the destruction of healthcare will result in a culling of the elderly population…that way, they can say that he eliminated millions from the Social Security obligations… :em98:

  4. 4
    sig94 says:

    First they want to kill the unborn and now with out of control gov’t spending they will tax the yet unborn.
    Will you frigging liberals make up your minds?
    Ya can’t kill them and tax them at the same time!
    It’s like the Nazi’s putting an IRS collection booth at the smokey end of the ovens.

  5. 5
    Crustyrusty says:

    For all the media’s whining about Walter Reed, they seem to forget that THAT is Government Health Care. When the boondoggle goes national, we’re going to have nothing BUT Walter Reeds, but then the media won’t say shit, ’cause it’s their boy in the seat now.

  6. 6
    Imperial Librarian Azygos says:

    Just a reminder about how much the state cares for you.

    I’m on Fire

    Since this incident the Phoenix police refused to file charges against the State Inspector. The State Attorney Generals office said they would be happy to represent the state employee if charges were brought against him. When I asked them about the civil rights of the patient they said they did not care about that.

    Two weeks after I complained to DHS the POS that did this either was fired or suddenly retired but DHS swept it under the rug.

  7. 7
    BigDogg says:

    It is sad … because those with the means to do so will obtain private-pay health services outside of the socialized system, and (in most cases) will receive the best care.

    The socialized health system will become a race to the bottom, with people having to wait in long lines for shitty care. The ones who can’t afford private-pay care will be stuck with a shitty system for shitty care. Ironically, it is these same people who are clamoring for socialized medicine, thinking that it’s going to be a free ride to top notch care.

    If only the ignorant masses were not so ignorant …

  8. 8
    mindy1 says:

    nothing to do but wait it out and hope that in 2012 we have a better candidate, or that obama screwed things up so that people want another change.

  9. 9
    LC Draco says:

    I am not waiting anything out. I am in the process of getting my LoDs (Line of Duty) investigations done at the VA as quickly as possible. Getting in the system is the hardest part, til Obomo grandfathers no LoDs accepted or something asinine like that.

  10. 10
    Eyas says:

    Problem: The American people can’t afford hospitals, doctors, and medicine.

    Solution: Have them pay for hospitals, doctors, medicine, AND a government bureaucracy.

    BRILLIANT!

  11. 11

    Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere @ 3: AHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    mindy1 sez:

    (O)r that obama screwed things up so that people want another change.

    Count on it. Provided, of course, that we are still able to vote in 2012. Unless we do what seems needed. *AHEM*

  12. 12
    Eyas says:

    LC Gunsniper sez:

    And when the guvmint denies you treatment you can’t sue them like you can an insurance company.

    Forget about suing for denial of treatment; say goodbye to malpractice suits — for legitimate cases of malpractice!

  13. 13
    rickn8or says:

    I’ve already had twenty-one years of Gummint Health Care; I can hardly fucking wait for the public at large to find out what it’s like.

    The sad part is that I have a son that is a CRNA and a d-i-l that’s an RN; soon they’ll be paid like your average DMV slug.

  14. 14
    SeniorD says:

    It is perfectly clear there are now Two Americas. The first belongs to the elite Congressional nobility and their Holy-wood supplicants who are able to afford ‘off-market’ health care. They disdain the common man as they cross fly over country on their way to some ‘Must Be At’ Party. Granted, the collective IQ of this America can be measured using 10 fingers only.

    The other America belongs to the unwashed, stinking masses that litter the ground with plebian epithets, poorly made clothing and wait in lines for medical care, food, and the occasional glimpse of their respective Baron or Baroness when the deign to visit their satrapy. It is in THIS America where the tide of resentment, liberty and freedom rises day by day. It is THIS America that barely contains its collective anger over the theft of the future for yet unborn generations.

    It is THIS America that will show President-in-training Hussein al-Chicago, his corrupt, simpering, sniveling creatures and those of the Harpy Harridan’ neutered toys what happens when REAL MEN have had enough.

  15. 15
    LC Aggie Sith says:

    LC Gunsniper @:

    What the communist health care idjits don’t realize is that it won’t guarantee care in the least

    Oh, they will guarantee healthcare…you’ll just have to wait for weeks to be seen, months for the consult, and years for the treatment. Of course, by then they hope you will have a) forgotten about it, b) sought treatment elsewhere, or c) died.

    I’m willing to wager the prefer the last scenario.

  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18
    LC Ted says:

    DJ let’s use some common sense an logic here.

    If a person is on government assistance, why whould they not vote for people that say they will increase goverment handouts? Be honest, they will do it in a new york minute.

    In my opinion taking benefits from the government makes you a slave to it because it takes away your freedoms.

    I think that to de-incentivise wellfare, all persons enrolled in it should be disenfranchised. This would not apply to disability or social security as they are permanent conditions. A hand up does not mean you can hang on to me for life.

    Ted

  19. 19

    I just love it when people come to this country and then tell us how we should be voting.

    You’re sooooo right, Deej. How dare he CHOOSE to come to this country, because unlike in his homeland, we hadn’t yet bought into the “confiscate private enterprise so we can all live at the standard that the least of us has chosen” system of belief yet. How dare he actually go through the motions, jump through the hoops, and become a naturalized citizen, and in so doing, gain a better understanding of our nation’s government and history than many of our native-born who barely make inquiry beyond the minimum indoctrination they receive in pubick screwl. How dare he then have the temerity to suggest that all those people who voted for Obama, you know, the ones we all saw on youtube who voted for Obama, and then when asked about some of his past actions, and stated beliefs said “Really? He did that, or he believes that? Oh wow, man.”, yeah those ones, perhaps shouldn’t be trusted with dangerous instrumentalities, like a car, a ballot, or taxes. You see, unlike the illegals that the Dems keep trying to bribe with the right to vote, and other rights that would be reserved for citizens by a sane and responsible government, he did it the right way AND THEREFORE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO EXPRESS AN OPINION. ESPECIALLY in his own house, so to speak.

    *walks off shaking head*

  20. 20
    LC Getalis, Imperial Czar of Pharmacology says:

    LC Gunsniper sez:

    What the communist health care idjits don’t realize is that it won’t guarantee care in the least. All they’ll achieve is a system even more bureaucratic than the present system, a system that will set it’s own criteria in doling out care and will not be answerable to it’s “customers”. And when the guvmint denies you treatment you can’t sue them like you can an insurance company.

    I stopped by Jack-in-the-Box during my 3:30 lunchbreak this afternoon; the party in front of me in line consisted of two obese Hispanic women and an obese Hispanic eight year-old. I’m not talking “few extra pounds” or any of that “full-figured” bullshit; these fuckers were Homo spherians to a T.

    After playing a delightful round of Guess-the-Bodyweight-Difference-Between-Yourself-and-that-Eight-Year-Old with myself, I had the opportunity to watch as the women finished placing their order, obtained their Supersize Beverage cups, then trundled directly over to the soda machine. And yes, the little kid got a huge cup of Strawberry Fanta™ all to herself.

    I couldn’t help but note how many empty calories (not to mention dental rot) could easily be avoided if the “parent” would simply insist upon a Diet soda for the kid. But no, the leftards have scared everyone shitless over the mythical danger posed by “artificial” sweeteners. So everyone clunks down the “all-natural” high fructose cornshit and pats themself on the back for being teh smart.

    I also couldn’t help but see this as the face of socialized medicine. I have no doubt that kid will have diabetes before her high school prom, hypercholesterolemia by age thirty, and will probably lose her legs by the time middle age rolls around. And productive people like myself, who work hard, eat right and think ahead, will be stuck with the bill.

    Someone tell me again why I should be forced to pay for the piss-poor decisions of others?

  21. 21
    LC Ted says:

    I ran across this a while back and instead of me typing it in, I’m going to cut and paste. Its from the American Patriot Party (www.americanpatriotparty.cc) and I think it describes Socialism for what it is.

    Socialism as Defined by the American Patriot Party

    As socialism is a non descriptive generalization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism), The American Patriot Party establishes a universal description; Not as a form of government or leadership, but as a condition that is obvious in the form of dependency; willing or unwilling.

    Though dictators may have in history distanced themselves from the definition of socialism, the control over their people and their bureaucratic institutions would have no effect without the willing (or subjugated compliant) dependent bureaucracy.

    Socialism thereby, as defined by this party, is a condition of a country that begins when the percentage of the willing (or subjugated compliant) bureaucracy dependent upon any government exceeds 5% of its citizenry.

    Socialism in practice, as defined by this party, is the percentage of its citizenry reaching 8% or more, who accept and are dependent upon government for their income in any way, This includes, but is not limited to, direct employment, government contracts, retirement benefits.

    These percentages are established in part by usury.

    Socialism by willing subjugation (voluntary slavery), is when society as a whole, accepts such practice without revolt, reverse or immediate action to correct.

    Socialism by this party is also a condition wherein certain, inalienable rights are jeopardized and corrupted by social propriety dictated by bureaucratic and or social born establishments.

    Socialism of its root cause as concluded and as defined by this party, is the percentage of those dependent upon government or subjugated (willing or unwilling) by government in relationship to the percentage of those who are not.

    This definition precedes all definitions of government, government structure, socially established groups or political titles.

    Socialism in the Form of Institutions

    Socialism, as defined by this party, further relates to the similar operation of socialism by any government, or private entity, corporate, union, special interest, any combination of, or of other title.

    If it operates like a socialism, it is socialism.

    The extent of which if great enough in numbers of dependent citizens, can establish the definition of a independent socialist government operating in a free country.

    In no way is a private “entity” or “group” of any type a individual, as fictionally attempted to be defined and presently practiced in “law”.

    These entities or groups are in fact social entities and social established groups in bureaucratic form and are not free enterprise;

    This as free enterprise is not established or ordained by government or by its approval, such approvals which are in place exactly because of the collective power that these establishments, which are private social bureaucracies, fiscally, or cause driven and fiscally supported by distant masses, can possess over truly free enterprise found only in the individual;

    And as having such powers are subject to strict limitations by federal, state and county laws, including, but not limited to, highly localized monopoly laws of counties. (see next regarding distant powers)

    Socialism in the Form of Distant Collective Action and Powers
    or Distant Legislatures

    Socialism can be established by the action of special interest groups or other entity that through national, international or local lobbying or collective involvement nation wide by distant citizenry and through distant legislatures, controlling local issues over and against those citizens that will most directly effected; as if such distant national and international groups had arbitrary powers over individuals or local communities whose lives are most effected.

    Socialism can be established through manipulation and bribery by federal government withholding of tax money already received from taxes unless the state or county abides by the will of the federal government which itself through international lobbying and treaties turns to inflict arbitrary powers of those agreements over states forcing them to inflict arbitrary laws over county, and county over local communities.

    Such can be seen in highway funds, planning laws and environmental laws.

    Rule by distant legislatures is not a feature of freedom and was opposed by the founders:

    Rights of the Colonists 1772

    …Now what liberty can there be, where property is taken away without consent? Can it be said with any colour of truth and Justice, that this Continent of three thousand miles in length, and a breadth as yet unexplored, in which however, its supposed, there are five millions of people, has the least voice, vote or influence in the decisions of the British Parliament? Have they, all together, any more right or power to return a single member to that house of commons, who have not inadvertently, but deliberately assumed a power to dispose of their lives, Liberties and properties, than to choose an Emperor of China! Had the Colonists a right to return members to the british parliament, it would only be hurtfull; as from their local situation and circumstances it is impossible they should be ever truly and properly represented there. The inhabitants of this country in all probability in a few years will be more numerous, than those of Great Britain and Ireland together; yet it is absurdly expected [Volume 5, Page 397] by the promoters of the present measures, that these, with their posterity to all generations, should be easy while their property, shall be disposed of by a house of commons at three thousand miles distant from them; and who cannot be supposed to have the least care or concern for their real interest: Who have not only no natural care for their interest, but must be in effect bribed against it; as every burden they lay on the colonists is so much saved or gained to themselves. …”

    How closely our federal government has returned to the practice of tyranny as defined by and warned of by our Originating Founders..

    Socialism in the Form of Total Democracy

    Total Democracy, that is, democracy that is not subject to, or has no basis of unchangeable certain, inalienable, rights, is socialism.

    Total Democracy is not freedom, Total Democracy is mob rule. as it offers no such protections guaranteed by freedom;

    A Country’s citizenry which is ran by a Total Democracy, are societal whim and arbitrarily ruled subjects;

    Not free citizens.

    These subjects are the product found of every subjugated country on earth by way of willing and voluntary slavery.

    Socialism by willing subjugation (voluntary slavery), is when society as a whole, accepts such practice without revolt, reverse or immediate action to correct.

    The feature of certain inalienable rights is necessary for any country to consider itself free; of which only one country in the world at this time, The United States of America, possesses; However waning and in need of repair it is.

    All other falsely acclaimed “countries of a free world” such as Britain, are just that, falsely acclaimed; This, as rights are not rights in these countries but privileges; privileges that can be voted or taken away at any moment by their own social bureaucracies.

    This was very clear to the founders:

    James Madison:

    “…The governments of Europe are afraid to trust the people with arms.

    If they did, the people would surely shake off the yoke of tyranny, as America did.

    Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors.

    The citizens of Britain remain, today as well as then, as with all other nations of the world, except the United States, debased subjects of arbitrary power.

    Nothing has changed and modern situations do not alter it.

    Modern appliances and health care do not remove this fact, which is based on servitude of a citizen to his government bureaucracy’s will and subjugation by an arbitrary power that suppresses certain, inalienable rights;

    Such a ridiculous reasoning like that, would be like giving a slave a clean shirt and dental care so long as he did what his master said and stayed and worked quietly in his master’s yard;

    A peace and prosperity only by and through subjugation and pacification.

    Rights of the Colonists 1772:

    First, “The first fundamental positive law of all Commonwealths or States, is the establishing the legislative power; as the first fundamental natural/law also, which is to govern even the legislative power itself, is the preservation of the Society.”

    Secondly, The Legislative has no right to absolute arbitrary power over the lives and fortunes of the people:…”

    Thirdly, The supreme power cannot Justly take from any man, any part of his property without his “consent”, in person or by his Representative

    These are some of the first principles of natural law & Justice, and the “great Barriers” of all “free states”,…”

    Simply being associated with the United States in trade or treaty does not entitle socialist countries such as Britain to fly banners or descriptions that associate them with freedom;

    Such banner is reserved only for those who respect, practice and protect at all levels, those certain, inalienable, rights defined by the Originating Founders, against those defined tyrannies so listed in part within the Grievances of the Declaration of Independence.

    Our own Federal, State and County government servants should take note.

    Ted

    edit, figures, all the good underlines didn’t transfer

  22. 22
    Light29ID says:

    Ok, like I’ve said before (damn I sound like my mother). When do we start watering the tree of liberty with the blood of the tyrants?

  23. 23
    americanexpat says:

    The difference is, the spending the previous president did was for expendables such as bombs and ammunition that will never show a return.

    Oh, I don’t know, Deej. I’d call Muhammad Atef, Abu Layth al-Libi, Uday and Qusay Hussein, Abu Khabab al-Masri, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and every other al-Qaeda, Baathist, or Shiite extremist goatfucker that ate a U.S. bomb or bullet paid for in part with my tax dollars a good return on my investment. Sending those assnuggets to hell may not guarantee their respective countries will prosper in the future, but the chances are much better with them as worm food.

  24. 24

    how does the public own something that does not exist until created by individuals?

    And if the public does “own” the airwaves, shouldn’t it be the public that mandates what is played on “their” airwaves?

    Dave’s really big on the “majority” these days, and the majority seems to want Hannity, Rush, Beck, and Boortz.

  25. 25
    LC Draco says:

    DJ sez…

    Let’s see if you can define the “Fairness Doctrine” outside of Rush Limbaugh’s or Sean Hannity’s definition. I’m not sure you or anyone else here actually can.

    I got my FCC license in 1981. Won’t tell what stations I was on, but careful about generalizations, Deej. :em02:

    I have kept my eye on this growing cancer for years, even tho it was introduced in 1949, years before I was born.

  26. 26
    Southern Libertarian says:

    LC Getalis

    I couldn’t help but note how many empty calories (not to mention dental rot) could easily be avoided if the “parent” would simply insist upon a Diet soda for the kid. But no, the leftards have scared everyone shitless over the mythical danger posed by “artificial” sweeteners. So everyone clunks down the “all-natural” high fructose cornshit and pats themself on the back for being teh smart.

    I agree with you on the diet coke/artificial sweetner issue, however based on how morbidly obese the kid you are speaking of is I kinda doubt that diet soda will help out.

  27. 27
    Southern Libertarian says:

    Diet soda? LMFAO :em01: , I laugh my fuckin ass off evry time I see some fat tub O’ goo order two big macs, super sized fries w/ a diet cola??????? As if the diet cola is gonna cancel out all the unhealthy calories that they are getting from the rest of thier “meal”. Give me a break, if they really wanted to lose some weight they should run thier fat asses around the block afew times. (Or afew thousand)

    Diet Coke???????? What a crock of shit

  28. 28

    SLib,

    You must have missed the memo. Diet soda cancels all the fat calories. If you break up a cookie into crumbs and just eat the crumbs, there are no calories. If you eat the same dessert someone else is having, the calories cancel each other out. Get with it, will ya?

  29. 29
    Southern Libertarian says:

    LC SkyeCHild

    SLib,

    You must have missed the memo. Diet soda cancels all the fat calories. If you break up a cookie into crumbs and just eat the crumbs, there are no calories. If you eat the same dessert someone else is having, the calories cancel each other out. Get with it, will ya?

    DOH!!!! :em98: . My apologies, I must have missed that memo.

  30. 30
    LC Moriarty says:

    Given that your health records are now the property of the Feds, there won’t be much to worry about. You and you physician will be obliged to conform to Federal “guidelines” in every aspect of your life — or you simply won’t qualify for care and it will be denied to you.

    Need a knee replacement? If you’re overweight (not necessarily obese) or a diabetic, expect that the government (and not your physician) will demand that you change your behaviors before allowing your doctors to proceed with surgery, regardless of what their opinions might be.

    Withholding medical treatment can and will be used as a political cudgel to assure conformity and maintain control over society.

  31. 31
    BigDogg says:

    DJ,

    You whined like a little bitch when the leftards you support didn’t have control of the White House and Congress. The party in power was supposed to care about and pay attention to the voices of ALL Americans, even those who didn’t vote for them. You sought to blame everything on Bush, because he was in charge, and absolve your icons (Klintoon et al) of responsibility for the US’s problems – even over the last couple of years when Dems controlled the Congress.

    You whine like a little bitch now that the leftards you support do have control of the White House and Congress. You still want to blame everything on Bush, even though BO is in the White House and Dems are now responsible for all of it. Now the party in power has free reign to do whatever it wants, however it wants, and those who didn’t vote for them are supposed to just shut up and accept it?!?!?

    The upshot seems to be that no matter what, you’re a whiny little bitch.

  32. 32
    Lycurgus says:

    The main problem with socialized anything is the attitude it fosters with the both the users and the bureaucrats, which is “who gives a shit, it’s not our money”.

    Every year the US govt. cannot account for between $20-30 Billion (yes, that is 20-30 thousand million dollars we are talking about). No-one knows where it has gone; more to the point no-one entrusted with it gives a shit. They can just gouge the taxpayers for more next year.

    The second problem is the spiralling cost, as all socialized institutions become sinks for the (otherwise) unemployable. From my experience, the UK NHS seems to follow the 80/20 rule where 20% of the staff make it work as best as they can while the others freeload. Of course, being a gummint entity and totally PC, it is almost impossible to fire any of the parasites.

    The third problem is the way it skews voting in a country (which is obviously what the Obamassiah wants): The NHS is the UK’s largest employer (over 1m people). When Tony Blair’s ZaNu Labour came to power they increased the NHS budget by £40 billion (bearing in mind the total tax take in the UK was around £500 billion) which nearly all disappeared into pay rises. They also increased the number of public sector ‘workers’ by around 650,000. It has got to the point now that in Wales and Northern Ireland 77% of the economy is the public sector, 70% in the North of England and Scotland.

    None of these people is ever going to vote for a party promising spending cuts. So socialists become the default party of power. That is what happened across the rest of Europe, it just took the UK longer to be subdued.

  33. 33
    Ogrrre says:

    The “private sector” can’t stimulate the economy because that money just isn’t available to anyone unless it is coming from the government level.

    DJ, I thought that, in spite of being a liberal, you were smarter than this. Government doesn’t make money, government prints currency. Currency does not become money until it is used as a facilitator in economic transactions. Else, DJ, the government could just turn on the printing presses and make all of us rich. Now, I realize that a great number of Democrats believe the last sentence, but the only thing that would do is create hyperinflation. Check out what happened in Germany after WW1 and in Argentina in, when was it, the 1970s?
    DJ, if Comrade Obama the Great, the Obamassiah, wishes to end the recession, he would stop throwing money extorted from the taxpayers at the problem and reinstate the Bush tax cuts, or rather, intitiate a flat tax and cajole Congress into rolling back some of the more onerous regulations on business. In other words, make this Country more business friendly. It is businesses, DJ, not the government from whence wealth comes. All of the feel good legislation that the Federal Government passes does nothing but exert inflationary pressures on the economy. The increases in the minimum wage do not help those making minimum wage, they only devalue the currency. All the welfare programs are inflationary in nature, as they allow those who do not wish to work to be able to compete with the producers in this country for a limited supply of goods and services, which bids the prices of the goods and services upwards.

    I just love it when people come to this country and then tell us how we should be voting.

    Hello? This is democracy — we are ALL entitled to our vote/opinion — even if you don’t happen to agree with it.

    Well, DJ, I was born here, and I believe that unless you pay taxes, you should not be allowed to vote, especially for Congress. As the House of Representatives is responsible for the bills for taxes and spending, why should someone who pays no taxes have an equal voice? It is in the best interests of the nontaxpayer to vote for some asshole who promises to take money from a producer to benefit the parasite. And, considering the dearth of education occuring in this country concerning economics and civics, as demonstrated by the 52%, there are a great many voters in this country who have no business voting for anything but an American Idol contestant, just as the Emperor said.
    Besides, DJ, as Misha is a naturalized citizen, he probably knows more about how the U.S. Government is supposed to be run than you do.
    So, besides having to be a taxpayer before you can vote for Congress, I believe that every voter, when registering to vote, must take and pass the same civics test that naturalized citizens must take to become a citizen. Then, perhaps, the voters will know what they are voting for when they vote. And, face it, DJ, there were way too many voters who voted for Hussein because of the color of his skin.

  34. 34

    The fact of the matter is that it’s a matter of questionable ethics to insist that people who pay net taxes of zero or less should be allowed to vote. That is, people not contributing to support the government being allowed to have a say in how it should be spending the resources it takes from other people. This is ridiculous.

  35. 35

    As for who should vote … I feel that a physically non-disabled person on welfare ( or a father who allows his progeny to be supported by welfare ) has demonstrated enough mental incompetence to be denied the franchise.

    We don’t let children, felons, or ( in most states ) the insane to vote. A person on welfare ( or a deadbeat dad ) has made the State their parent and abdicated responsibility … no vote until they act like adults.

  36. 36
    LC Moriarty says:

    The “private sector” can’t stimulate the economy because that money just isn’t available to anyone unless it is coming from the government level.

    … money and productivity which is of course stolen from that very same private sector, at gunpoint. Starting off with coercion isn’t very moral, but if the means justify the ends, there can be no rational dissent, can there?

    It isn’t the first time the government has come along and stimulated the economy by pumping money into infrastructure projects that involved putting the private sector to work.

    Indeed. Look how successful Stalin was in building infrastructure with labor obtained from the private sector.

    Screw it, let’s be pragmatic about this, take the gloves off and get some real Hope and Change going. Your labor, your life and your body already belong to the State. What’s a little time in a labor camp if it’s for The Common Good?

    Who could possibly object to that?

  37. 37
    LC Xealot says:

    I’ve feared this for a long time. This is so incredibly frustrating. Is idiocy truly this rampant of a disease? Everyone has a right to everything, right? My neighbor has a right to my property?!?! I have a right to make someone else do work for me without compensating them at all for it? What the fuck is this stupidity?

    A smart man once told me that my rights end at my nose. And that’s true. I don’t have a right to anyone else’s crap, but I have a right to my own property. I have no right to make them do shit for me, though I can try my hardest to convince them to with money, words or anything else that doesn’t force. And they certainly don’t have to listen to me if they don’t want to, though I have the right to talk until I’m blue in the face, if I so desire.

    Should a doctor operate on me simply because I think I need it? No. A doctor operates on me because I (or those I pay to insure me) can pay him to do so. If I cannot pay, then I should turn to charity, friends or family to help me. If I have no friends, no family, no money and no charity would get within ten feet of me, then maybe I would deserve to get sick, no? Only sudden, genuine life-threatening emergencies (like, say, being shot) should short circuit this, and only then because the person must be ALIVE to be given the opportunity to pay for services rendered.

    The core of this problem is Darwinism. The Left pushes Darwin’s theories as truth, yet refuses to adhere to its principles. We abandon the strong, the smart and the resourceful. We idolize the stupid (but pretty) celebrities. We give our shit to the lazy, stupid and weak. Ironically most of this is a choice. One can make a case for the person born with retardation or deformity, but what about those who are intentionally ignorant (the overwhelming majority)? Why SHOULD anyone help them? We have short circuited evolution, where the idiots breed and the intelligent are forced to support them.

    The Left would tell you that Universal Health Care is a human right, but it isn’t. A human has the right to be free, but he has NO right to force anyone else to do shit for him or give him shit because, in the end, that makes the other person NOT free. That’s why socialism is morally wrong. I have NO OBLIGATION to help anyone I don’t want to. If I choose to, based on my faith, my morality and/or my principles, that is my own business.

    Our rights end at our noses, at our own property, and extend no further. We have the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but we don’t have the right to live at someone else’s expense, take away someone else’s liberty or have government-guaranteed happiness. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron, I don’t care what anyone says to the contrary.

  38. 38
    LC Xealot says:

    I should add to my post above that I have no health coverage currently, as I was recently laid off. Even being in such a situation, I understand the risks associated with the said lack of coverage, and firmly stand by my principles on the matter. Life was never meant to have a “safety net.” Life is tough, risky and doesn’t always work out the way you want it to. Anyone who says different is selling something bogus. That would be the Democrats (and even a few Republicans).

  39. 39
    Eyas says:

    SeniorD sez:

    It is perfectly clear there are now Two Americas. The first belongs to the elite Congressional nobility and their Holy-wood supplicants who are able to afford ‘off-market’ health care. They disdain the common man as they cross fly over country on their way to some ‘Must Be At’ Party. Granted, the collective IQ of this America can be measured using 10 fingers only.
    The other America belongs to the unwashed, stinking masses that litter the ground with plebian epithets, poorly made clothing and wait in lines for medical care, food, and the occasional glimpse of their respective Baron or Baroness when the deign to visit their satrapy.

    I tend to follow the view that socialism is not a thing or situation to be achieved, but rather the means to achieve another situation — i.e., communism. It is the road between a free market/ free society and a communist/totalitarian society, and that socialism is not a situation that a country can arrive at – rather it is a matter of degree. That is, that (almost) every society has either a greater or lesser degree of socialism. So, the goal of socialism is, ultimately, communism.

    The funny thing about communism is that it, too, has a goal — or a definition of the complete and perfect achievement of communism. It’s not the elimination of private property, nor the ownership of all the means of production. Those are the means of achieving the goal. No, the goal of communism is the elimination of socio-economic classes. No one is “better” than anyone else, everyone is “equal” (by decree).

    What’s so funny about this is that the actual situation that comes about with communism – or an extreme degree of socialism – is a separation of classes that is more extreme, more grossly unfair, more unequal, and more oppressive than any other class division ever invented. The vast majority of the population is forcibly relegated to a limbo of quasi-poverty, misery, and oppression – unable to change or better their condition. A minority of the population becomes the “state” class – government employees with an almost miniscule betterment of their situation as compared to the majority. A slightly favored class, but still an underclass, with very little chance of mobility or improving their circumstance. Finally, there is the ruling elite; who live in near complete freedom, massive wealth stolen from the underclass, and with nearly unlimited power to accomplish their whims by further tyranny over the underclass. A more feindish, diabolical, unjust, unequal, grossly tyrannical society IS NOT POSSIBLE. It makes fuedalism look like a bunch of hippies singing Kumbaya around a campfire. It’s more akin to the Indian view of “untouchables”, except that the “untouchables” in this case is pretty much everybody.

    All achieved by the woefully retarded attempt to eliminate class. To create a classless society. That’s the joke.

    They say that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. To me it’s the same as saying, “The road to Hell is paved by Liberals.” The bricklayers of Purgatory.

  40. 40
    Eyas says:

    Don’t any of you realize that you CANNOT win an argument with DJ?

    That you CANNOT change his mind?

    You CANNOT do it with logic. You CANNOT do it with reason. You CANNOT do it with fact. And, if you think that you can do it with emotion and “feelings”, guess what? …… You CAN”T.

    You are all un-feeling, un-thinking, un-educated, un-civilized CRETINS. And he is the one all-wise, all-knowing, all-feeling DJ — the only one here CAPABLE of being right.

    Why do you try?

  41. 41

    Eyas sez:

    You are all un-feeling, un-thinking, un-educated, un-civilized CRETINS. And he is the one all-wise, all-knowing, all-feeling DJ — the only one here CAPABLE of being right.

    Why do you try?

    ‘cuz school was cancelled today due to snow and I got nothing better to do…..

    I take that back, the Les Paul needs tuning and playing…..I now have something better to do than argue with liberals.

    Thanks for the motivation Eyas

  42. 42

    LC Xealot sez:

    A human has the right to be free, but he has NO right to force anyone else to do shit for him or give him shit because, in the end, that makes the other person NOT free.

    Sounds just like slavery to me. Funny, the blacks are STILL ragging on us about slavery, and, with voting for Jugears, they have simply exchanged one kind of slavery for another.

    Ironic, isn’t it?

  43. 43

    Jaybear, Colonel of Imperial Ancient Artillery sez:

    If you and your leftist friends find those things objectionable, then don’t do them,

    Or better yet, find a country where they don’t already exist, and move there.

  44. 44

    Jaybear, you magnificent bastard!!! :em69:

  45. 45
    LC Xealot says:

    Another concept I see on this Universal Health care business is the idea that people deserve it because they can’t afford it due to disability and/or other physical or mental shortcomings.

    People can OVERCOME shortcomings. For instance, one need only look at Stephen Hawking, confined to a wheelchair and seemingly useless, but possessing one of the greatest minds of our time. Another person might have some horrendous disability that requires expensive meds, but be a hard worker, intelligent and strong-willed and have such immense value to the world as to far outweigh the cost of medication. There are those who are mentally retarded, but still manage to support themselves through physical labor or basic jobs, and if you ask me they are a lot more intelligent than a number of Lefties. At least they understand they must work to get what they want and need.

    The point of the matter is that these people overcome said health shortcomings, and are given the opportunity (through the free market) to, essentially, compensate society for the burden their conditions impose. Obviously Stephen Hawking’s contributions to science far outweigh his medical bills, and such is proven by the fact that he can PAY for the treatments. Similar situations exist all over America, where people overcome one hardship by excelling at something they are good at and are consequently able to pay someone to help them deal with whatever shortcomings they have.

    The few that CAN’T work or rise high enough on the career ladder, are vastly outnumbered by the ones who WON’T. If those unwilling and ignorant get sick and die… tough shit.

    This goes far beyond medical care, of course. A computer geek might, say, build websites but have no idea how to fix a car. He pays the mechanic to deal with this problem. And the car mechanic may someday come to need the computer geek’s services, and pay him to fix his broken computer. Should the government subsidize computer repair and car repair too? That can be very expensive. What about home repair? How about Financial Planning (that’s taken a beating lately)? Where do you draw this fucking line, anyway?

    Point is, the free market has a way of sufficiently compensating everyone except the amazingly stupid and/or completely lazy irregardless of what their shortcomings are. One demonstrates a level of value as a working, intelligent individual by being able to compensate others for these services. Temporary hardships are usually solved with friends, family, charity, churches, etc… And often with the expectation of repayment (in kind, or service), in any case. Why does the government need to get involved? For the .00001% of cases where there is no means to pay and the individual actually acted correctly and somehow got colossally unlucky and has no one willing or able to help? Fine, you want to cover the .00001%, do that. Universal health care is the government’s answer instead. Cover 100% to guarantee the .00001%. How many people have no health coverage, no means to pay, aren’t lazy, are trying to better themselves and are actually getting sick enough to need serious medical treatment with NO one available to help them except the US government? Not many I’ll wager.

    So I repeat, harsh as it may sound… The people who won’t work, have no job skills and no legitimate reason to be this way… if they get sick and die, just who is it harming? I think it’s cleaning up society and the gene pool a bit.

  46. 46
    Jerry says:

    Gee, isn’t it ironic that most endeavors the liberals love so much ALL require government “subsidies” or intervention to survive? Most cannot stand on their own. Think Amtrak, city transportation, etc, etc. Conservative talk radio survives, DJ, because people actually listen to it and support it. Sponsors, in turn, buy time and everyone is happy. Everyone but the liberals, who insist on banging their sippy cups yelling “NOT FAIR, NOT FAIR!” They tried Airhead America in NYC, the number one market in the country and it tanked. In New York City ferchristsakes, liberal utopia! Just an observation, DJ, from someone a little older than you and who has worked in the broadcast business for many years. Above all else, broadcasting is a BUSINESS, and the purpose of any business is to make money, you know, a profit, a dirty word to most liberals. It’s a conspiracy, don’t you know.

  47. 47
    lc purple raider says:

    What the big beef is about now concerns the fact that six giant corporations own 96 percent of the radio and television stations in this country. In some markets, only one company owns every radio and television station, and they no longer format stations based on whether they can make money, but whether they can simply tie up a frequency by keeping viewpoints that might run counter to their company’s interests off the air. Even if the majority of people in that market happen to share that same viewpoint.

    And I wrote this previously:

    Well, well, well, lets just look at those “mega” corporations.

    CBS – Leftist to the core.

    NBC – Leftist to the core.

    Disney/ABC/ESPN – Leftist to the core.

    Fox – Right leaning for its news department, the entertainment division is leftist to the core.

    Clear Channel – Leftist, except for its talk division, where it has 4 conservatives out of 25 talkers.

    Citadel – Leftist management, who has managed to screw the pooch.

    CBS Radio (including Westwood One) – Leftist to the core.

    Cumulus – Leftist to the core.

    Nextmedia – Leftist to the core.

    Salem – Right leaning.

    Time Warner/Turner – Leftist to the core.

    Interesting, in Chicago there are no Clear Channel talk stations.

    The talk stations in Chicago are WIND (Salem), WGN (Tribune), the leftwing Err-America stations (4 stations and they have about the same ratings as dead air) and WLS-AM (Citadel).

    So, out of 27 radio stations in Chicago, there are 2 that would be considered right-wing, WIND and WLS.

    What about the other 25?

    So how about it DJ?

    BTW, every license I’ve seen applied for has cost money. Lots of money.

  48. 48
    LC Moriarty says:

    If you and your leftist friends find those things objectionable, then don’t do them,

    Or better yet, find a country where they don’t already exist, and move there.

    We did.

    (Who let them in?)

  49. 49

    Xealot,

    Liberals do not believe in the marketplace of ideas approach to free speech. That’s concept reserved for crazy conservatives who cling to their time-tested ideals and solutions that Libs continue to characterize such things as “tired old ideas”. Saying such things to a Liberal will only reward you with cricket chirps.

  50. 50
    LC Xealot says:

    Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere @:

    Liberals do not believe in the marketplace of ideas approach to free speech. That’s concept reserved for crazy conservatives who cling to their time-tested ideals and solutions that Libs continue to characterize such things as “tired old ideas”. Saying such things to a Liberal will only reward you with cricket chirps.

    Unfortunately true. Libs love to regulate things. Everything has to be fair. Whoo-dee-fucking-doo. Life ain’t fair, and it isn’t going to get any better by censoring shit.

    I mean seriously. It’s like these morons never left pre-school “now everyone play nice! Share your toys! If you bring something special, bring enough for everyone! YAY!”

    Now you naughty right wing children share your air time with the lefties! Bring enough airtime for everybody! YAY!

    What a truckload of epic bullshit. If it sucks, and you can’t sell enough adspace to keep going, fuck sharing airtime with it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.