do you want obama to succeed?

[KarateCowboy]

We have universal healthcare. We just do not have taxpayer subsidized health care.

 

[ScottBot]

We have universal healthcare. We just do not have taxpayer subsidized health care.

I was actually watching Glenn Beck the other day and he had on his show a doctor who set up his practice to charge his patients a flat rate of $79.00 per person per month for all inclusive health care....




....and the government is trying to shut him down, saying he is running an insurance business without a license.

He and his partners have over 7,000 patients as part of their practice and more people knocking on the door because of this simplification of care, and the government wants no part of it. So I don't want to hear that the government wants to make health care more accessible. They want to control it. Period.

 

[KarateCowboy]

I was actually watching Glenn Beck the other day and he had on his show a doctor who set up his practice to charge his patients a flat rate of $79.00 per person per month for all inclusive health care....




....and the government is trying to shut him down, saying he is running an insurance business without a license.

He and his partners have over 7,000 patients as part of their practice and more people knocking on the door because of this simplification of care, and the government wants no part of it. So I don't want to hear that the government wants to make health care more accessible. They want to control it. Period.

What a beautiful post you made.

It certainly is true. When we look at the statistics, the people who are for socialized medicine and other things are significantly less generous with their own money than those who are against it. It's not about helping others. It's never about helping others. It's about controlling others.

 

[JustOneWay]

What a beautiful post you made.

It certainly is true. When we look at the statistics, the people who are for socialized medicine and other things are significantly less generous with their own money than those who are against it. It's not about helping others. It's never about helping others. It's about controlling others.

And which statistics were those?

 

[romanov]

In a good society, we would have a mutual obligation to one another to generally protect each other's health and safety; we do that by supporting public institutions that serve the public good and trust.

In a good society is not an answer. In a good society could, no should mean, we voluntarily take care of those in need. I asked you, what right do I have to one second of your life?

 

[Saving Hawaii]

And which statistics were those?

The ones that compare people who donate money to the church where they socialize with their friends every weekend against everyone else? "Charitable giving" tends to be very heavily favored towards the "keeping pastors employed" and the "potlucks" funds... not so much towards giving a man a hand when he's down. And we haven't even hit on "charities" that are really just an excuse for a tax haven.

Can't say I give that much to charity. I kept a family of three (plus a little girl on the way) off the streets for most of last winter; the dad had been laid off and they'd lost their home. So I let them stay in mine free of charge until they could find their own place again. How am I supposed to report that? Does that even classify as "charitable giving"?

 

[rambot]

So I don't want to hear that the government wants to make health care more accessible. They want to control it. Period.

No. The government wants to protect the PROFITS of somebody. Who?

If the government "wanted to control it", wouldn't it be better to suggest they want to socialize it?

 

[KarateCowboy]

The ones that compare people who donate money to the church where they socialize with their friends every weekend against everyone else? "Charitable giving" tends to be very heavily favored towards the "keeping pastors employed" and the "potlucks" funds... not so much towards giving a man a hand when he's down. And we haven't even hit on "charities" that are really just an excuse for a tax haven.

Can't say I give that much to charity. I kept a family of three (plus a little girl on the way) off the streets for most of last winter; the dad had been laid off and they'd lost their home. So I let them stay in mine free of charge until they could find their own place again. How am I supposed to report that? Does that even classify as "charitable giving"?

Actually that's not true. And the stuff about potlucks you're just plain making up.

I am happy to oblige, JOW
http://philanthropy.com/free/articles/v19/i04/04001101.htm

 

[oldbetang]

Obama is a democrat, not a socialist. He's a capitalist and he is center right.

That Political Compass is a joke. It has Biden and Obama to the right of me. LOL!

 

[ScottBot]

That Political Compass is a joke. It has Biden and Obama to the right of me. LOL!

Ain't that a joke. Cynthia McKinney is more libertarian than Bob Barr? Are you kidding me? Give me a break, that political compass has no credibility whatsoever. John McCain is more conservative than Sarah Palin? Barrack Obama is more of an libertarian than John McCain? This entire thing is a joke.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

I knew Sarah was more conservative than John! =D

 

[canukian]

I was actually watching Glenn Beck the other day and he had on his show a doctor who set up his practice to charge his patients a flat rate of $79.00 per person per month for all inclusive health care....




....and the government is trying to shut him down, saying he is running an insurance business without a license.

He and his partners have over 7,000 patients as part of their practice and more people knocking on the door because of this simplification of care, and the government wants no part of it. So I don't want to hear that the government wants to make health care more accessible. coThey want to control it. Period.

nevermind the it.
they want controll.
personally i like god to be in control.
oh wait he is.

 

[rosenherman]

to you want obama to succeed and lead us down a road with government in control of health care, the bank and insurance industries as well as the auto industry...or do you want him to fail and let some of these business fail with him?

Since you explained it more fully . . . I want him to fail. The government has no reason to be in control of health care, banking, insurance, manufacturing, etc. He's obviously incapable of governing, why would we want him in charge of anything else?

 

[rosenherman]

European-style socialism hasn't destroyed Norway, or Sweden, or France, or the Netherlands.

None of those countries are, or ever have been the high quality of this country.

 

[praying]

Since you explained it more fully . . . I want him to fail. The government has no reason to be in control of health care, banking, insurance, manufacturing, etc. He's obviously incapable of governing, why would we want him in charge of anything else?

Why is that? What are you basing that on, considering he has only been in office 7 weeks.

 

[rosenherman]

Depends on what one means by fail. I absolutely want to see him fail at implimenting certain aspects of his agenda but no, I don't want to see him fail as a president. And if one were to really look at what Rush said when he said he wanted to see Obama fail, I think any reasonable person would see that that is basically what he meant too.

Not basically. That is specifically what Limbaugh said. He did not ever say he hopes the obama presidency fails.

 

[Garyzenuf]

None of those countries are, or ever have been the high quality of this country.

How are you measuring 'quality'?

*

 

[Garyzenuf]

The government has no reason to be in control of health care, banking, insurance, manufacturing, etc.

Why not, because the private sector has been doing such a bang-up job so far?

He's obviously incapable of governing, why would we want him in charge of anything else?

Yeah best to put the <staff edit> GOP back in who got the whole works gummed up in the first place, or perhaps you would like to govern 300 million Americans if you think it's so easy.

*

 

[rosenherman]

Why is that? What are you basing that on, considering he has only been in office 7 weeks.

Since he was inaugurated, the stock market has lost one quarter of its value. It's down a thousand points in that 7 week period. Last month's unemployment jumped more than it has since World War II and he's still playing with stem cell research, education. Education is not in trouble, stem cell research is not in trouble. As the economy continues its slide obama keeps doing exactly what he's been doing. Even he should be able to see by now that he needs to focus on the economy, ignoring it is obviously not working.

 

[rosenherman]

Why not, because the private sector has been doing such a bang-up job so far?

It's their business to mess up. It's the public's business to determine if they want to support these businesses. That's what "Free Enterpise" is all about. As soon as the government steps in to run things, the public loses the right to choose and the businesses can do what they want knowing the government will either protect them or bail them out.

Yeah best to put the retarded GOP back in who got the whole works gummed up in the first place, or perhaps you would like to govern 300 million Americans if you think it's so easy.

The GOP would be much preferable to the socialist dems. Americans do so much better when we can do things ourselves instead of having the government hand it to us. I'm sure you couldn't understand that though.