Showing posts with label healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label healthcare. Show all posts

June 28, 2012

Obamatax [Romneycare]




From Reason.com:



Why the GOP Will Wish It Could Lead with Ron Paul After This ObamaCare Ruling

by Brian Doherty, June 28, 2012

Excerpts:

Suderman again, from earlier this month
The GOP candidate's promises to do away with the president’s health law have never been terribly convincing: His plan to offer states waivers to avoid the law probably won’t work. His promises to push for repeal have always come across as hollow when paired with his defense of his own law.
That’s even more true now. Not only did Romney accept the mandate in Massachusetts, he forcefully defended it while his staff insisted on its inclusion. And despite widespread distrust of Romney’s commitment to unwinding the federal health care overhaul, Romney decided to appoint as a senior adviser someone who profits from ObamaCare and professionally urges conservative legislators to fall in line with one its key directives despite contrary advice from every major policy shop that opposes the health law.
Does this sound like someone whose commitment to opposing ObamaCare and its mandate is in any way reliable? It’s almost as if Romney doesn’t really find ObamaCare or its underlying structure particularly objectionable, and is merely pretending to vehemently oppose the law because he believes that’s what the voters his campaign is targeting want to hear...
Ron Paul:   in his book,  Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Effect Our Freedom, "A better description of...the past forty to fifty years is the takeover of medical care by the corporations. We now have a form of corporatism veering toward fascism....Regardless of party, corporate special interests  are protected....Corporations, unions, and government stand between patients and their doctors regardless of motivation. The quality and cost of medical care can never be improved by forcing on the American people greater debt-financed involvement in medical care..."

Link:  http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/28/why-the-gop-will-wish-it-could-lead-with

January 10, 2012

Ron Paul expresses gratitude to cheers in New Hampshire


   by Diane V. McLoughlin
New Hampshire, January 10th, 2012:  Clearly delighted, in his speech thanking his supporters Ron Paul spoke about freedom; the deplorable state of the economy; ending all the destructive wars abroad which do nothing but make enemies while weakening security at home.
Ron Paul spoke about how liberty means we should be able to live out our lives as each sees fit. To believe what we want to believe - or not believe. He stated if we pulled back the funding of the Military Industrial Complex, we would still maintain a robust defense, without the corrupt enriching themselves while demanding more profitable war.
And, he said if we do that, maybe the country would be able to maintain social services such as healthcare. But if we don't end the wars, the country will go broke.
The twelve-term Congressman thanked his supporters. Dr. Paul said he always tried to do the right thing, but - clearly, deeply moved - he had no idea [so many who believed what he did] were out there - the crowd roared - and he left the stage waving, with a grin from ear to ear. 

----------------------

At time of writing:  With 81% of electoral districts reporting, the results for the top three finishers in New Hampshire, are as follows: 

            Mitt Romney 38.3%  Ron Paul 23.2%  Jon Huntsman 17%, with all other candidates in the single digits.  - dvm

July 30, 2010

Choices - Universal Healthcare vs. Universal Destruction

by Diane V. McLoughlin, writer, peace activist
                  -  main website mcloughlinpost.com

Although I am an agnostic, and consider myself to be an independent politically, one of the many newsletters I subscribe to is Chuck Baldwin's.  Baldwin is an American politician.  He ran for President under the Constitution Party banner in 2008.  He is also founder-pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida (Wikipedia.)  

On some things Mr. Baldwin and I agree.  This is very interesting to me.  For example, we both support the repeal of the Patriot Act. 

But there are areas where we differ.  I respectfully wish to address in particular the importance of political compromise, and, specifically, for perhaps surprising reasons, on the issue of universal health care.
I feel it is imminently worthwhile to engage. The Constitution Party opposes not only the Iraq war, but any war that is not officially declared by Congress, and any war that is not necessary for America's defense. 

Mr. Baldwin writes that patriots:

Are 'strong proponents of the principles contained in the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. [Me:  check.] 

'You also readily acknowledge that our rights come from God, not government.'  [I believe rights do not come from government; they are natural rights that are an intrinsically inherent aspect of the nature of Man, whether you believe in God or not.]

Baldwin:

That patriots, 'believe in a limited federal government and would never aid and abet the burgeoning surveillance state that both the federal and some State and local governments are creating, meaning you would never allow your business to be used by the government to trample the personal and privacy rights of citizens. In other words, you oppose the so-called USA Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and any other act that abridges protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.'  [double, triple check.]

Further, 'you are neither a neocon nor a liberal [check.]

'In other words, you support the principles of limited government; [me: honest, effective government];

'do not believe America should fight preemptive, undeclared wars; [CHECK!];

'oppose Obamacare (socialized medicine); ['Obamacare' is too flawed; hobbled by private, for-profit interests];

'resent the growing police state; [check];

'and refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils" for the sake of party partisanship.  [This is the coming-together problem, right here.]

The Constitution Party is anti-abortion [gray areas for me];

Anti-illegal immigration [squeamy on this.  Reluctantly, the law is the law. Some hospitals and school districts are drowning in red ink because of illegals who don't pay taxes but eat up public services.]

They are pro right-to-bear-arms (and believe a patriot business owner would therefore, for example, 'never prevent lawfully armed citizens from entering your establishment.' [Yikes!  For your interest, there is something like a hundred to one difference in gun mortality rates between the U.S. and gun-controlled Canada.]

The big shapes:  I feel that the initiative is slipping away and time is running out.  What is most important is two-fold:  fostering peace and protecting constitutional rights - for all the world's citizens. 

The Achilles Heel holding all of us back is our unwillingness to compromise even a little bit to get the job done.  The malevolent exaggeration of differences between Americans should cease. This is no esoteric exercise in argument.  People's lives are being destroyed - ours and our neighbors:  American, Palestinian, Israeli, Pakistani, Iraqi, Afghani...

Which brings me to a point of compromise for the Constitution Party to consider:

'...the suicide rate for soldiers who first entered the Army in their late 20s was three times higher than for those in the younger group.

'General Chiarelli said he did not want to typecast, “but I think it’s fair to say in some instances it would be a soldier that’s possibly married, couple of kids, lost his job, no health care insurance, possibly a single parent.” Such a soldier, General Chiarelli said, “is coming in the Army to start all over again, and we see this high rate of suicide.”  [From: 'Pentagon Report Places Blame for Suicides'; Elizabeth Bumiller; NYT; July 29, 2010.]

The above statistic is shocking.  In order for men and women to provide for their families, they are enlisting in the government's wars to kill overseas so that their children don't starve or die for lack of jobs and accessible health care at home. 




The Constitution Party does not believe in no government; it believes in limited government.  As surely as a well-paved, publicly-paid-for road gets us safely from A to B, the issue of universal health care is a matter of conscience that no one of any religious creed or political persuasion would deny their neighbor.

Now, it would appear that in its denial to American families, lack of healthcare plays its part in the war machine's inexorable roll to universal destruction.