I ask myself this question almost daily. And almost daily, I seem to find example, after example, of idiotic ideas from Democrats and wonder "how the hell are they still in office"?
Case in point: Hillary Clinton.
With her ever so slight lead in some areas and her losing in others, statements like this that would normally sink any other candidate, seems to have little to no effect on her supporters.
Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.
The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC's "This Week," she said: "I think there are a number of mechanisms" that are possible, including "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment."
Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms. With her proposals for subsidies, she said, "it will be affordable for everyone."
Freedom of choice? Nope. Fuck you. You can't "decide" to not have health insurance. So I guess we'll have to trust Hillary to decide what's "affordable". I don't get up every morning at 6 am to drudge my way through traffic and bust my ass to let Hillary try to take even more fucking money out of my pocket. I have health insurance. My wife has health insurance. However, it's our decision to make, not Hillary's or anyone else's.
Health care isn't a universal right. I know it's something a lot of people don't want to hear, but the government, and more importantly, taxpayers, don't owe you a healthy body. You can't tell me that if health care was "free" or significantly reduced in cost, that people wouldn't abuse the hell out of it. People would eat horribly, not exercise, and be dependent on medications. Even when Hillary presented her "health plan" several months back, it barely mentioned exercise, but mentioned medications dozens of times.
What does that tell you?
This is the second time in recent memory that Hillary has said she want's to "take" money from people, forcefully if need be. First, she said it about oil companies profits, and now with people's wages.
And listen to the seals clapping after she gives her speech. These same idiots seem to think that taking more money out of the hands of ordinary Americans will make everything better.
Hillary doesn't understand that people who don't have health insurance, generally are living paycheck to paycheck, and if she tries to pull this off, she's taking money out of the pockets of the people she claims she's helping. She says she champions the poor, but this plan would do nothing but hurt them. Yes, it might help a handful of people who are crushed with massive medical bills, but, you don't punish the many to benefit the few.
Hillary, a lot of Democrats, and several Republicans, will never understand that if you cut spending, you can make our economy robust again. For example, here's a picture of our budget. Notice the insane amount of money and the insane amount of waste that happens.
George Bush just sent to Congress a $3 trillion dollar budget. Now, let's take a look at what he proposed there:
The spending proposal, which shows the government spending $3 trillion in a 12-month period for the first time in history, squeezes most of government outside of national security, and also seeks $196 billion in savings over the next five years in the government's giant health care programs -- Medicare for the elderly and Medicaid for the poor.
Even with those savings, Bush projects that the deficits, which had been declining, will soar to near-record levels, hitting $410 billion this year and $407 billion in 2009. The all-time high deficit in dollar terms was $413 billion in 2004.
So, instead of being fiscally responsible like Republicans want, George Bush put together a budget that puts at record levels of debt?? Look, I'm all for the war on terrorism, but I fail to see why we can't do this on the cheap. Finish up Iraq, allow CIA's to do targeted assassinations, and let's get back to being fiscally responsible. No one on Earth can go further and further into debt forever. Even fellow Republicans agree:
"They've obviously played an inordinate number of games to try to make it look better," Sen. Judd Gregg, the top Republican on the Budget Committee, said in an interview with The Associated Press.
"Let's face it. This budget is done with the understanding that nobody's going to be taking a long, hard look at it," said Gregg, R-New Hampshire.
But that's not to say that Bush is solely to blame:
To achieve such a small boost, Bush would hold hundreds of programs well beyond what is needed to keep up with inflation. He also seeks to eliminate or sharply slash 151 programs he considers unnecessary.
Bush targeted many of the same programs last year but Congress rejected the effort.
I don't know how more clear I can say this: STOP THE OVER SPENDING!
Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment