AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

You say in one breath that we haven't paid enough for our past sins and must do much more, and in the next that you don't hold your country in contempt. You seem to be unable to acknowledge, much be proud of the millions upon millions of people who live free and safe today because there is a United States of America. And you condemn the very talking heads for inflaming people but can't see that they are the voice of the people and they wouldn't have anything to bank if they were not voicing what all of their audiences are already thinking.
But you probably are like some other Leftists and would like to shut them up so that you would hear only what is comforting and pleasant to hear whether or not it is the truth. But don't delude yourself for a minute that it would change the minds of the loyal opposition.

Foxfyre wrote:

I am an older American who was schooled in love and appreciation for what our Country was intended to be.

Foxfyre wrote:

This is why the Founders did not include charity or benevolence or relief of anykind as a responsibility of the Federal government and every President has adhered to that principle until FDR.

Then I admire you, fox, for supporting yourself in your older age without putting the burden on those coming up behind you. That is, unless, you accept Social Security monies and/or Medicare coverage - in which case you are a hypocrite.

A MINORITY VIEW
BY WALTER WILLIAMS
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2009
Washington's Lies

President Obama and congressional supporters estimate that his health care plan will cost between $50 and $65 billion a year. Such cost estimates are lies whether they come from a Democratic president and Congress, or a Republican president and Congress. You say, "Williams, you don't show much trust in the White House and Congress." Let's check out their past dishonesty.

At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee, along with President Johnson, estimated that Medicare would cost an inflation-adjusted $12 billion by 1990. In 1990, Medicare topped $107 billion. That's nine times Congress' prediction. Today's Medicare tab comes to $420 billion with no signs of leveling off. How much confidence can we have in any cost estimates by the White House or Congress?

Another part of the Medicare lie is found in Section 1801 of the 1965 Medicare Act that reads: "Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize any federal officer or employee to exercise any supervision or control over the practice of medicine, or the manner in which medical services are provided, or over the selection, tenure, or compensation of any officer, or employee, or any institution, agency or person providing health care services." Ask your doctor or hospital whether this is true.

Lies and deception are by no means restricted to modern times. During the legislative debate prior to ratification of the 16th Amendment, President Howard Taft and congressional supporters said that only the rich would ever pay federal income taxes. In 1916, only one-half of 1 percent of income earners paid income taxes. Those earning $250,000 a year in today's dollars paid 1 percent, and those earning $6 million in today's dollars paid 7 percent. The lie that only the rich would ever pay income taxes was simply a lie to exploit the politics of envy and dupe Americans into ratifying the 16th Amendment.

The proposed tax increases that the White House and Congress are proposing will probably pass. According to the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Foundation, during 2006, roughly 43.4 million tax returns, representing 91 million individuals, had no federal tax liability. That's out of a total of 136 million federal tax returns. Adding to this figure are 15 million households and individuals who file no tax return at all. Roughly 121 million Americans -- or 41 percent of the U.S. population -- are completely outside the federal income tax system. These people represent a natural constituency for big-spending politicians. Since they have no federal income tax obligation, what do they care about higher taxes or tax cuts?

Another big congressional lie is Social Security. Here's what a 1936 government pamphlet on Social Security said: "After the first 3 years -- that is to say, beginning in 1940 -- you will pay, and your employer will pay, 1.5 cents for each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year ... beginning in 1943, you will pay 2 cents, and so will your employer, for every dollar you earn for the next 3 years. ... And finally, beginning in 1949, twelve years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year." Here's Congress's lying promise: "That is the most you will ever pay." Let's repeat that last sentence: "That is the most you will ever pay." Compare that to today's reality, including Medicare, which is 7.65 cents on each dollar that you earn up to nearly $107,000, which comes to $8,185.

The Social Security pamphlet closes with another lie: "Beginning November 24, 1936, the United States government will set up a Social Security account for you ... The checks will come to you as a right." First, there's no Social Security account containing your money, but more importantly, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on two occasions that Americans have no legal right to Social Security payments.

We can thank public education for American gullibility.

I suppose somebody so thoroughly brainwashed that Obama is indeed the messiah and the Democrats in Congress his loyal disciples and that they are as honest and trustworthy as any human can be would think that I was referring to financial impact. I wasn't. I was referring to much more basic fundamental principles such as the right and ability to voice grievances and objections and retain our other Constitutional, civil, legal, human, and unalienable rights as well. Seems to me the Left is gung ho to take that away from all of us.

And for the life of me, I cannot understand how people can become so gullible that they would not see how tragic that would be.

Foxfyre wrote:

As for sins, unlike presumably you see yourself, I have never owned slaves or condoned slavery nor, to the best of my knowledge, have I ever improperly discriminated against anybody. In fact I had opportunity to work directly to help eradicate some of the last vestiges of formal discrimination in this country. While I am very glad that chapter in American history is long behind us, I don't feel that I have anything to be ashamed of there. Another principle that separates modern conservatives and liberals is that conservatives feel responsible to atone for their own sins. Liberals seem to want me to atone for their guilt-wracked consciences.

And a bit later, in the same post, Foxfyre wrote:

You say in one breath that we haven't paid enough for our past sins and must do much more, and in the next that you don't hold your country in contempt. You seem to be unable to acknowledge, much be proud of the millions upon millions of people who live free and safe today because there is a United States of America.

You can count yourself lucky that you don't live in a glass house.

Snowe Pressured To Reach Health Care Compromise
(Associated Press, September 6, 2009)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, is determined that something be done about health care.

She said "People are feeling desperation and despair."

Snowe prides herself on her bipartisan approaches to tough issues and once again finds herself in the middle of one with big stakes.

Snowe is a member of the so-called Gang of Six on the Senate Finance Committee, which is under intense pressure to work out a compromise.

She would create a public health insurance option only if private insurers prove unwilling or unable to meet certain affordability targets. Nonprofit agencies, she proposes, would offer health insurance only if private insurers could not cover 95 percent of the people in their regions with plans costing no more than about 15 percent of a person's or a household's annual income.

Perhaps you don't realize that both programs are bleeding billions of dollars red ink and are not sustainable?

Foxfyre wrote:

figure the blood and treasure we have expended to eradicate slavery, discrimination, and unjustifiable oppression here and abroad is the best we can do to pay for our past sins regarding treatment of others. I figure the trillions we have contributed to relief and empowerment of other peoples compensates at least in part for any economic damage we intentionally or inadvertently created for others.

Foxfyre wrote:

As for sins, unlike presumably you see yourself, I have never owned slaves or condoned slavery nor, to the best of my knowledge, have I ever improperly discriminated against anybody. In fact I had opportunity to work directly to help eradicate some of the last vestiges of formal discrimination in this country. While I am very glad that chapter in American history is long behind us, I don't feel that I have anything to be ashamed of there. Another principle that separates modern conservatives and liberals is that conservatives feel responsible to atone for their own sins. Liberals seem to want me to atone for their guilt-wracked consciences.

Nice dodge --- You invoke the plural we in the first comment and then say that because you yourself have "worked directly" that your conscience is clear. Putting the two together you've said that your efforts have compensated for the past sins (I deny they are in the past) of Americans. Man, you have a high opinion of yourself! Go ahead and sleep at night with your conscience clear -- your work is done, you've atoned, "We've done enough" -- God Bless, Fox!

Quote:

Snowe Pressured To Reach Health Care Compromise
(Associated Press, September 6, 2009)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, is determined that something be done about health care.

She said "People are feeling desperation and despair."

Snowe prides herself on her bipartisan approaches to tough issues and once again finds herself in the middle of one with big stakes.

Snowe is a member of the so-called Gang of Six on the Senate Finance Committee, which is under intense pressure to work out a compromise.

She would create a public health insurance option only if private insurers prove unwilling or unable to meet certain affordability targets. Nonprofit agencies, she proposes, would offer health insurance only if private insurers could not cover 95 percent of the people in their regions with plans costing no more than about 15 percent of a person's or a household's annual income.

A non-partisan, pragmatic approach by both Democrats and Republicans can assure that at least some steps can be accomplished this year. Other steps in health care reform can be worked out in succeeding years.

Sorry, foxy, you're money is gone. Long gone - there's none left - so yes, if you're bellyaching about the financial affairs of the country and accepting monies from it's tits, then you're a hypocrite. Those YOU elected to safeguard the piggy bank forgot to tell you they were more interested in their own reelection than protecting your future. Live with it -- you made a mistake by trusting those you empowered to protect your future. By taking public monies that we can't afford to give you, and complaining about it -- you're a hypocrite.

Fine JPB. You are a brilliant woman so because you say it, it must be true. Does it make you feel noble and righteous to say things like that? Do have a great day.

We are trying to preserve the best healthcare system in the world while improving it.

I can't imagine what kind of arrogance it requires to think about others as judgmentally as you apparently do.

Foxfyre wrote:

We are trying to preserve the best healthcare system in the world while improving it.

Speaking of the devil .... In today's Albuquerque Journal (pages A1, A6 and A7) are a couple of reports and articles about the best healthcare in the world:


(Not that I think, results would be much better elsewhere in the world.)

Walter, I will try to keep this simple so your translator won't misinterpret it.

wandeljw wrote:

Quote:

Snowe Pressured To Reach Health Care Compromise
(Associated Press, September 6, 2009)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, is determined that something be done about health care.

She said "People are feeling desperation and despair."

Snowe prides herself on her bipartisan approaches to tough issues and once again finds herself in the middle of one with big stakes.

Snowe is a member of the so-called Gang of Six on the Senate Finance Committee, which is under intense pressure to work out a compromise.

She would create a public health insurance option only if private insurers prove unwilling or unable to meet certain affordability targets. Nonprofit agencies, she proposes, would offer health insurance only if private insurers could not cover 95 percent of the people in their regions with plans costing no more than about 15 percent of a person's or a household's annual income.

A non-partisan, pragmatic approach by both Democrats and Republicans can assure that at least some steps can be accomplished this year. Other steps in health care reform can be worked out in succeeding years.

I don't want a compromise for something that is going to make things worse just so Congress can brag that it did something. I want a plan that will make things better.

Is that too much to ask?