Why We Don’t Have a Right to Health Care
Sep 19, 2009 bill of rights, commentary, constitution, politics
We have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Does health care fit into any one of these categories? Those are derived from biblical principles by our founding fathers – the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable rights which are in turn outlined in the bill of rights. They cannot be taken from us by any person, government, or organization.
Health care, on the other hand, is not guaranteed. The reason is that someone has to provide the service, who in turn has to provide for his or her family using the payment for his or her services. By saying that I am entitled, or have the right to, his or her services means that even if I cannot pay for said services, he or she still has to treat me anyway. Thus, I am robbing him or her of their pursuit of happiness and the wages for their labor, which is wrong.
Liberals would say (in a very indirect manner) that I have a right to health care, even if I cannot pay for it – but those providing the health care should not have to work for free. That means that if I need health care and can’t pay for it, I am going to have to take money from someone else to pay the health care provider. That brings us back to the scenario of robbing the provider, but now I am robbing someone else who also has their own happiness to pursue.
The government has done a fantastic job of convincing people that when they get money from the government, it was absolutely free. Thankfully people are beginning to wake up to the fact that “free” money causes inflation through the expansion of the money supply. Inflation, in essence, is a hidden tax because every time a dollar is printed it lowers the purchasing power of all the dollars that you and I have in our pockets… so we have in effect paid a tax to allow the government to fund some new deficit spending project, like universal health care, for example. So again, everyone who traded in their clunker and got $4500 for it, was subsidized by the rest of us. We won’t see any of that money back, and our money is worth less now. Do you think that is right?
Along the same lines, do huge banks have a right to survive if they’ve been managed poorly? The effect on the money in the bank is the same: the value deteriorates! It seems far more innocent to give free health care than to bail out a bank, but both require taking money from someone else..something the founding fathers never envisioned for a free America.
Tags: bill of rights, constitution, health care, universal health care
Why the GOP is a one issue party
Sep 9, 2008 Ron Paul, politics
Major points of the video:
After Sarah Palin’s speech at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, Palin became the life of the party, and an admittedly formidable foe to the Democrats because of her out-of-the-beltway conservatism, and has made everyone forget that party leaders are uninterested in the conservative values that she represents.
Conservatives have been uncomfortable with John McCain because of his support for capaign finance reform, opposition to drilling in ANWR, his vote against the Bush tax cuts, his suscribing to global warming histeria and his support for a bill that would have granted amnesty to illegal aliens.
However, despite McCain’s liberal positions on other issues, Republicans seem to think that he is the best man to fight the war on terror.
Rudy Giuliani and Joe Lieberman were selected to represent the party at the RNC. Giuliani is extremely similar to Hillary Clinton in almost every area except for the war, but his ability to invoke 9/11 suddenly makes him a Republican star. Lieberman, despite being further to the left than Obama, is also selected to speak. Lieberman was Al Gore’s running mate in 2000. He supports universal health care, supports partial birth abortions, he is anti-gun, and opposed Samuel Alito’s appointment to the Supreme Court.
When WTMA host Richard Todd asked Cindy Mosteller why the Republicans were embracing Joe Lieberman, she said “Because he understands the importance of 9/11. This is a big tent party.” However, the tent was apparently not big enough for Republican congressman and presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul, who was not allowed normal credentials at the RNC, despite his own convention (rally for the republic which drew more than 12,000 people) discussing reducing the size of government, returning to the constitution, and bringing the Republican party back to its conservative roots, and Ron Paul being introducted by Barry Goldwater Jr. whose father, Barry Goldwater, was the conscious of the conservative movement for half a century. Paul was not even let into the doors at his own party’s convention due to his opposition to the Iraq war, despite him getting more votes in the primaries than Rudy Guiliani and Fred Thompson, who both had speaking roles at the RNC.
When Cindy Mosteller was asked why anti war Republicans like Ron Paul, North Carolina congressman Walter Jones, or Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel are not given a voice at the convention, she replied, “If you get a tent too big it’s bound to have holes in it.” She added, “Hagel could not even get up on a national stage and even make a case… and you know why? Because the surge has, by God, worked.” So much for the big tent.
You are not to be tolerated in the Republican Party if you agree with the majority of Americans who are against the war in Iraq, yet being pro gun control, pro socialized health care, pro-choice, and pro-amnesty is perfectly acceptable as long as your are pro war. If you are a staunch conservative, yet against the war, you are no longer welcome in the Republican Party.
The definition of a neoconservative is one who believes that America’s greatness is measured exclusively by our willingness to dominate the globe politically and militarily. For neocons, foreign policy is primary and every other issue is secondary.
The 2008 McCain campaign (and nomination) represents the takeover of the Republican Party by neoconservatives. Sarah Palin, who once supported anti-war conservative Pat Buchanan for president, now mouths the same neoconservative foreign policy rhetoric that defines the new GOP.
Sarah Palin, like Spiro Agnew to Richard Nixon and Dan Quayle to George H.W. Bush, will be a conservative vice president who has virtually no impact on the moderate President they serve. McCain will more likely appoint Joe Lieberman as Secretary of State than give Sarah Palin any responsibilities more important than office secretary.
The only reason McCain picked Sarah Palin as Vice President is to pacify traditional conservatives on the many issues they still care about so that in Republican victory, McCain and the neoconservatives can get to work on their only issue – War.
Tags: 9/11, Al Gore, amnesty, ANWR, Barry Goldwater Jr., Bush tax cuts, campaign finance reform, Chuck Hagel, Cindy Mosteller, conservatism, conservative values, constitution, Dan Quayle, democrats, Fred Thompson, George H.W. Bush, global warming, GOP, gun control, Hillary Clinton, illegal aliens, Joe Lieberman, John McCain, neoconservative, Obama, partial birth abortion, Pat Buchanan, rally for the republic, Richard Nixon, Richard Todd, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Samuel Alito, Sarah Palin, Secretary of State, Spiro Agnew, supreme court, surge, universal health care, Walter Jones
