Bill O'Reilly can't bring himself to admit that Obama is a socialist. To him the only thing that would make Obama a full fledged socialist is if he gave up his own land. It is possible he might consider Obama a socialist after he took our land, but a socialist isn't necessarily someone who succeeds at socialism. It is someone who believes in the premise of socialism. If that same person demonstrates this believe by actions and laws he tries to pass then that would make the man a socialist. After all a socialist is one who believes and adheres to the theory of socialism.
Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
According to the dictionary these are the things that define socialism. Now the question of whether or not Obama believes in these things or even most of these things is what needs to be determined. In the first definition we see that socialism involves a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy. Obama is certainly advocating this and even passing laws that would bring it about.
Obama's declaration that he believes in the redistibution of wealth and his actions to try to do just that through various programs and taxes shows this to be the case.
Bill O'Reilly seems to think that if he hasn't succeeded or if he lacs even one of the definitons of socialism that means he is not a socialist. It is interesting that for a man who says he believes in the no spin zone that he can't seem to resist the spin himself. When asked what it would take to make Obama a socialist in his mind O'Reilly responds that he doesn't believe in giving up his own house,
I believe Obama views socialism from its purest form and not from what it turns out to be. But then by this definition no one in the world is a socialist or a communist.
When you have a leader that openly advocates the redistribution of wealth isn't this advocating that we have all things in common and that it be forced if necessary for the good of the community?
I believe the problem is that O'Reilly think there is some extreme or black and white difference between progressives, democrats and socialists. I don't think there's all that much difference at all and all they are doing is splitting hairs. This is rather like saying one church isn't Christian because they believe in baptism by dunking while another is because they believe in sprinkling. They ignore the big thing of what really makes you a christian and argue over something that is no real issue at all regarding that particular belief system.
Now I know there are baptists and the like that will argue quite strenuously that that particular issue is essential to Christianity, but I don't think they could support it from the bible or everyone would believe it. What matters are the core beliefs.
I don't know why so many people are afraid to admit if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck!
Monday, February 22, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Health Care - The Great Debate?
I find it amazing how we have allowed our non-representing representatives and the media to frame the debate on health care. All of them act as though health care is either a given or at least should be a given. They behave as though health care has always been understood to be a right. They behave as though it would not be possible to get health care without insurance and so they all continually bring the numbers of people who don't have health care.
They never reflect on the fact that there was no such thing has health care insurance a little over 40 years so. This is a recent thing. It started out as a niche market and grew. Because the insurance people paid exorbitant amounts of money for procedures and eventually for basic visits the price naturally went up.
Guilt is also used extensively. The assumption is always that everyone ought to have health care and so the pressure is put on politicians and the American public why constantly asking the question: What about those 10-12-30-40- 50 million people who aren't insured. Yes, the numbers change every time you hear them. They don't even know how many people aren't insured. Further I don't believe they care what the number is except insofar as it makes it sound like more of a crisis if the numbers are really high.
The pressure is thus put on us to feel guilty that others don't have health care again as though health care was a given. It is interesting as well that they always use the term health care when it is actually insurance they are talking about. Of course if you say "insurance" people might wonder if you really have a right to it or even a right to our compassion for those who don't have it.
Occasionally someone in the media will correct someone and say it's not health care but insurance, but this doesn't happen often.
Because they frame the debate from the start as though insurance is a foregone conclusion from there the discussion immediately jumps to how it's going to be provided not whether it should be. Obviously if you question whether it should be provided the politically correct insensitivity police come and attack you for not being compassionate.
Insurance of any kind is not a constitutional right. Retirement is not a constitutional right. Education is not a constitutional right. None of these things is the job of the government.
The next subtle deception and distraction is for our leaders to say "SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE!" or "We were elected to do something." as though doing something, anything, is better than doing nothing and there for no matter what option is offered they should vote on it.
They frame the republicans as the party of "NO", but again this is nothing more than a distraction. After all haven't the democrats said no to every amendment or proposal put forward by the republicans. Even more than this they've said NO to the republicans even taking part in the discussion.
Now they're talking about a summit, but the democrats are already preparing to put forward their bill though the use of reconciliation. They don't care what the republicans want. They simply want to get their agenda through and in the process take over more than 15% of the economy, on top of what they're taking with social security, medicaid, medicare, education, and all the other entitlements.
The fact that we can't afford it and that it amounts to far more spending doesn't matter and isn't discussed.
I'm convinced that health care provided by the government to one extent or another will pass and would even get republican support because of the way the debate has already been framed and no one has the guts to stand up and say no this isn't constitutional.
What happened to the constitution in all this. Our non-representing representatives are making the constitution irrelevant by the very way they posture.
We need to send the message to Washington to stop the madness, stop the spending, stop the taxing and start cutting back in a serious way.
We don't the IRS if we go to a flat tax. We don't need to be taxed at the outrageous percentages we are.
Many forget that the reason people left Europe for America originally was because of the outrageous taxes imposed on them in Europe... What were those outrageous taxes? Well income tax as about 1.5%, they were also taxed about 40% on fruits and necessities such as tea.
Let's get a clue. We are Taxed Enough Already!
No more insanity!
They never reflect on the fact that there was no such thing has health care insurance a little over 40 years so. This is a recent thing. It started out as a niche market and grew. Because the insurance people paid exorbitant amounts of money for procedures and eventually for basic visits the price naturally went up.
Guilt is also used extensively. The assumption is always that everyone ought to have health care and so the pressure is put on politicians and the American public why constantly asking the question: What about those 10-12-30-40- 50 million people who aren't insured. Yes, the numbers change every time you hear them. They don't even know how many people aren't insured. Further I don't believe they care what the number is except insofar as it makes it sound like more of a crisis if the numbers are really high.
The pressure is thus put on us to feel guilty that others don't have health care again as though health care was a given. It is interesting as well that they always use the term health care when it is actually insurance they are talking about. Of course if you say "insurance" people might wonder if you really have a right to it or even a right to our compassion for those who don't have it.
Occasionally someone in the media will correct someone and say it's not health care but insurance, but this doesn't happen often.
Because they frame the debate from the start as though insurance is a foregone conclusion from there the discussion immediately jumps to how it's going to be provided not whether it should be. Obviously if you question whether it should be provided the politically correct insensitivity police come and attack you for not being compassionate.
Insurance of any kind is not a constitutional right. Retirement is not a constitutional right. Education is not a constitutional right. None of these things is the job of the government.
The next subtle deception and distraction is for our leaders to say "SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE!" or "We were elected to do something." as though doing something, anything, is better than doing nothing and there for no matter what option is offered they should vote on it.
They frame the republicans as the party of "NO", but again this is nothing more than a distraction. After all haven't the democrats said no to every amendment or proposal put forward by the republicans. Even more than this they've said NO to the republicans even taking part in the discussion.
Now they're talking about a summit, but the democrats are already preparing to put forward their bill though the use of reconciliation. They don't care what the republicans want. They simply want to get their agenda through and in the process take over more than 15% of the economy, on top of what they're taking with social security, medicaid, medicare, education, and all the other entitlements.
The fact that we can't afford it and that it amounts to far more spending doesn't matter and isn't discussed.
I'm convinced that health care provided by the government to one extent or another will pass and would even get republican support because of the way the debate has already been framed and no one has the guts to stand up and say no this isn't constitutional.
What happened to the constitution in all this. Our non-representing representatives are making the constitution irrelevant by the very way they posture.
We need to send the message to Washington to stop the madness, stop the spending, stop the taxing and start cutting back in a serious way.
We don't the IRS if we go to a flat tax. We don't need to be taxed at the outrageous percentages we are.
Many forget that the reason people left Europe for America originally was because of the outrageous taxes imposed on them in Europe... What were those outrageous taxes? Well income tax as about 1.5%, they were also taxed about 40% on fruits and necessities such as tea.
Let's get a clue. We are Taxed Enough Already!
No more insanity!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
What are THEY giving us?
I find it amazing that no one and most especially our non-representing representatives want to ever talk about cutting spending. I don't mean cutting the rate at which spending will increase, but genuinely cutting the amount of spending they're doing... meaning that they spend less this year than they did last year.
This entire concept seems to be completely lost on our leaders and even largely on our population. No one wants them to cut such programs as social security, or medicaid or the like.
I believe the reason for this is that too many people view that money as money being given to them by someone else. They think if it as money the government simply has to give. They need to consider that they get that money from us.
It is important that we realize that we never get back as much money from them as they take from us. Rather than letting them take ever larger amounts of money from us we should be telling them to stop taking so much. If we keep the money in our pockets we will not be out anything. We forget that social security is only the government taking our money now with the promise of a regular paycheck in our later years in life, if we live that long. If we don't then they get to keep it.
If we keep all that money in the first place we can still invest it for our retirement, but the truly great thing is that if we die before we get there our families get the money. We can also be sure that money isn't being raided by our leaders for other things than what it was designed for.
Our leaders love using the term that social security is broken and needs to be fixed. The reality is that it's being robbed by THEM. There's no money there because our non-representing representatives view it as their personal slush fund for other things with the idea they'll pay it back later.
You might be wondering how they'll pay it back.... well with yet more of OUR money. This is the way the government works and this is what needs to be stopped.
Consider for a moment, if you make $50,000 per year the government by their time they're done with social security, unemployment, medicaid, medicare, federal income tax, state income tax, sales tax, gas tax, alcohol tax, and tax on everything else they can think of gets over 50% of your check. That means you give them about $25,000 a year.
Now imagine you get to keep all that money. this means in just 10 short years you have 1/4 of a million dollars more to work with than if the government weren't being so helpful. Do you really think you'd have a hard time preparing for retirement? Do you think you wouldn't be able to put your kid through private school with a far better education than what the public schools have to offer?
Consider over 30 years that you have $750,000 more. Don't forget you've been getting by on $25,000/year they've been letting you keep that means all that extra money can go for anything. Also don't forget that even with the little you've been able to keep of what you actually make most people are able to save quite a nice retirement and they do because they know just how poor social secuirty is.
It is time we wake up and realize the government isn't doing us any favors!
You will probably say, but if they stop social security I'll lose out on all that money. My response, "Why?" They still owe you that money according to the law. They have set or at least were supposed to set that money aside for your retirement so let them simply pay you back what you paid in plus interest?
Imagine you now have more say over the quality of teachers you have teaching your children.
I don't see much of a downside here. You've bought the lie that you need the government to take care of you when you get old and you need them to help you educate your kids. Do you really think people won't want to teach if the government isn't the one paying their pay check. If they only teach because of who pays them then their motivation is in the wrong place and I say we don't need those people any more.
It is time for a tax revolt in this country.
Demand your leaders not only stop all the spending but start cutting back.
This entire concept seems to be completely lost on our leaders and even largely on our population. No one wants them to cut such programs as social security, or medicaid or the like.
I believe the reason for this is that too many people view that money as money being given to them by someone else. They think if it as money the government simply has to give. They need to consider that they get that money from us.
It is important that we realize that we never get back as much money from them as they take from us. Rather than letting them take ever larger amounts of money from us we should be telling them to stop taking so much. If we keep the money in our pockets we will not be out anything. We forget that social security is only the government taking our money now with the promise of a regular paycheck in our later years in life, if we live that long. If we don't then they get to keep it.
If we keep all that money in the first place we can still invest it for our retirement, but the truly great thing is that if we die before we get there our families get the money. We can also be sure that money isn't being raided by our leaders for other things than what it was designed for.
Our leaders love using the term that social security is broken and needs to be fixed. The reality is that it's being robbed by THEM. There's no money there because our non-representing representatives view it as their personal slush fund for other things with the idea they'll pay it back later.
You might be wondering how they'll pay it back.... well with yet more of OUR money. This is the way the government works and this is what needs to be stopped.
Consider for a moment, if you make $50,000 per year the government by their time they're done with social security, unemployment, medicaid, medicare, federal income tax, state income tax, sales tax, gas tax, alcohol tax, and tax on everything else they can think of gets over 50% of your check. That means you give them about $25,000 a year.
Now imagine you get to keep all that money. this means in just 10 short years you have 1/4 of a million dollars more to work with than if the government weren't being so helpful. Do you really think you'd have a hard time preparing for retirement? Do you think you wouldn't be able to put your kid through private school with a far better education than what the public schools have to offer?
Consider over 30 years that you have $750,000 more. Don't forget you've been getting by on $25,000/year they've been letting you keep that means all that extra money can go for anything. Also don't forget that even with the little you've been able to keep of what you actually make most people are able to save quite a nice retirement and they do because they know just how poor social secuirty is.
It is time we wake up and realize the government isn't doing us any favors!
You will probably say, but if they stop social security I'll lose out on all that money. My response, "Why?" They still owe you that money according to the law. They have set or at least were supposed to set that money aside for your retirement so let them simply pay you back what you paid in plus interest?
Imagine you now have more say over the quality of teachers you have teaching your children.
I don't see much of a downside here. You've bought the lie that you need the government to take care of you when you get old and you need them to help you educate your kids. Do you really think people won't want to teach if the government isn't the one paying their pay check. If they only teach because of who pays them then their motivation is in the wrong place and I say we don't need those people any more.
It is time for a tax revolt in this country.
Demand your leaders not only stop all the spending but start cutting back.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Congressional Exodus
The media has been making a big thing about all the people saying they weren't going to run for office again. As far as I'm concerned this is a good thing. I have been of the mind for quite some time that we need to get rid of every one of them.
For far too long we have let these men and women get away with doing as they please without any oversight. We have not called them to account and we should have. The people are finally beginning to rise up and demand this of our leaders and this is certainly a good thing.
I do not believe that most of them can adequately give an account of themselves. I am not much interested in the reason these men and women are leaving office. I don't care. I'm just happy to see them gone and hope that we will find men and women of character.
We need men and women who have ethics. We need men and women who believe in the constitution and are determined to defend it not try to change it. We need men and women who are determined to shrink government.
Some think that income tax is something that has always existed in this nation but this is not so. Income tax is something that started in the early 1900's. Shortly after they started it we were seeing income tax of almost 75%. We were thrilled to see it drop to 25% and credit that with the roaring 20's when the nation took off financially. but no one seems to consider how much more it would have grown had we done away with the income tax all together.
We do not need to be taxed as we are. The government does not need as much to operate as they would have you believe. They do not need... We do not need all these entitlement programs. Consider for a moment all they are doing is giving you back the money they took from you in the first place. in many cases they are giving you back far less than they took.
We ought to be helping this exodus happen. If the incumbents we have won't leave office voluntarily we ought to be kicking them out with our votes. At the same time we need to look for people of value to replace them with.
We need to keep our government more local as it was meant to be. If we elect local leaders that we know and who are concerned about our local needs and work locally we may avoid some of the earmarks.
If we can get them to stop taxing so much they will not have the temptation to keep trying to bring the money BACK to our local areas. As I mentioned above they usually don't bring back nearly as much as they take.
We have come to think that we can't exist without the government. We've come to think that they HAVE to take all that money to provide for us. It is not their job to provide for us. It is not their job to provide education. It is not their job to provide retirement. It is not their job to provide health care.
None of these things are powers given to the federal government. Let's get back to the constitution. Let's find people who feel and obligation to defend the constitution and not change it as I state above. Those that feel a need to change the constitution are people we ought to question very carefully.
For far too long we have let these men and women get away with doing as they please without any oversight. We have not called them to account and we should have. The people are finally beginning to rise up and demand this of our leaders and this is certainly a good thing.
I do not believe that most of them can adequately give an account of themselves. I am not much interested in the reason these men and women are leaving office. I don't care. I'm just happy to see them gone and hope that we will find men and women of character.
We need men and women who have ethics. We need men and women who believe in the constitution and are determined to defend it not try to change it. We need men and women who are determined to shrink government.
Some think that income tax is something that has always existed in this nation but this is not so. Income tax is something that started in the early 1900's. Shortly after they started it we were seeing income tax of almost 75%. We were thrilled to see it drop to 25% and credit that with the roaring 20's when the nation took off financially. but no one seems to consider how much more it would have grown had we done away with the income tax all together.
We do not need to be taxed as we are. The government does not need as much to operate as they would have you believe. They do not need... We do not need all these entitlement programs. Consider for a moment all they are doing is giving you back the money they took from you in the first place. in many cases they are giving you back far less than they took.
We ought to be helping this exodus happen. If the incumbents we have won't leave office voluntarily we ought to be kicking them out with our votes. At the same time we need to look for people of value to replace them with.
We need to keep our government more local as it was meant to be. If we elect local leaders that we know and who are concerned about our local needs and work locally we may avoid some of the earmarks.
If we can get them to stop taxing so much they will not have the temptation to keep trying to bring the money BACK to our local areas. As I mentioned above they usually don't bring back nearly as much as they take.
We have come to think that we can't exist without the government. We've come to think that they HAVE to take all that money to provide for us. It is not their job to provide for us. It is not their job to provide education. It is not their job to provide retirement. It is not their job to provide health care.
None of these things are powers given to the federal government. Let's get back to the constitution. Let's find people who feel and obligation to defend the constitution and not change it as I state above. Those that feel a need to change the constitution are people we ought to question very carefully.
I Got The Money!
Anyone who votes for a representative because they are able to bring home federal dollars should consider carefully that all they did was bring back what they already took and then not nearly what they took.
You should not be happy that any representative is boasting how he got you something that he already took from you. Remember as well that if they are you getting you something it came from somewhere. Do you really feel that California should pay for some pork barrel job in Texas, or that Virginia should pay for something being done in Tennessee?
We would be far better off if told them to stop taking the money and just let us keep it as individuals. People who boast about being able to get other people's money for their own state are unethical to say the least.
Every person should understand how our leaders think about OUR money.
One Representative of California had this to say in response to a letter sent to her.
Letter: You know we as citizens have to cut back on our spending when our out go is more than our income. If you don't have enough money you need to stop spending so much.
Her response: We can ALWAYS GET MORE MONEY!
This is what our leaders think of us. we are their personal bank. Our money is theirs' to spend on whatever pet project or personal crusade they have in mind.
You work hard for your money. They don't work at all and yet feel they have a right to it!
Then they boast to you about how they're going to spend it in your state or your district FOR you!
It's time we get these spending maniacs out of their various positions. We need to find people who feel as responsible for our money as we do.
You should not be happy that any representative is boasting how he got you something that he already took from you. Remember as well that if they are you getting you something it came from somewhere. Do you really feel that California should pay for some pork barrel job in Texas, or that Virginia should pay for something being done in Tennessee?
We would be far better off if told them to stop taking the money and just let us keep it as individuals. People who boast about being able to get other people's money for their own state are unethical to say the least.
Every person should understand how our leaders think about OUR money.
One Representative of California had this to say in response to a letter sent to her.
Letter: You know we as citizens have to cut back on our spending when our out go is more than our income. If you don't have enough money you need to stop spending so much.
Her response: We can ALWAYS GET MORE MONEY!
This is what our leaders think of us. we are their personal bank. Our money is theirs' to spend on whatever pet project or personal crusade they have in mind.
You work hard for your money. They don't work at all and yet feel they have a right to it!
Then they boast to you about how they're going to spend it in your state or your district FOR you!
It's time we get these spending maniacs out of their various positions. We need to find people who feel as responsible for our money as we do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)