Some excellent insight into a previously unknown aspect (and there are so many to choose from) of the Health Care Bill. Personally, I think it's becasue insurance companies have such deep pockets (and the government coffers even deeper though filled with phantom dollars) that healthcare is at all-time highs. If the healthcare industry had to price its services more realistically, rather than taking the 500-1000 percent markups that convenience stores get on their goods, then we might see more affordable healthcare that people could pay for themselves. What we need is a competitive healthcare industry where the doctors and hospitals have to schmooze and court us, rather than the other way around. I think the doctors, too, in many cases, are at the mercy of the hospitals and the good-ole bottom line. Consumers win when banks compete, or so the commercials say, so why not the healthcare industry?
Nice try, but why do we need a national ID when our drivers licenses are already accepted as ID for voting? And you're kidding yourself if you believe that a digital voting system WON'T get tied to a person's voting record and everything else that's on a computer with their name on it. This is the computer age. Everything is being integrated. IBM has a program to integrate the medical information systems, as per their currently-airing commercials. Then, supposedly, the medical sciences can tailor medicines and treatments to us and, as stated in their ads, track trends in illnesses and diseases across generations of families, communities, and around the globe.
If those who are operating the polling places are doing their jobs and checking everyone in, and aren't afraid to question something that's iffy, then fraud should be diminished. Believe me when I say that if someone want's to get around a digital system they will find a way. And as far as Acorn is concerned, aggressivel prosecuting them for their actions is a good place to start.
[quote]"Guns cross state lines and they do so constantly, and this is a Sagebrush Rebellion-type effort to light some sort of fire and get something going that's pleasing to the gun nuts and that has very little actual sense," the communications director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence told the Associated Press.[/quote] I hope that if the law is challenged that Montana will be successful in defending it. Our lawmakers need to remember, however, without the will of the people behind them, they can do nothing.
American's have this view of the "government" being some large occupying force of politicians, but really it's a few hundred people in D.C. making laws and without the cooperation of the American people behind them they can pass all the laws they want but will find it hard to enforce them. When the Washington lawmakers loose sight of the will of the people, particularly lose sight of their responsibility to protect the sovereingty of their own state decision-making, then they should expect dissent. They've lost their focus on who they serve -- the people of their state and not the "invisible" occupying spirit of politics. I am sadded that the following comment was made by the communications director for the Brady Campaign, as quoted in the above-noted article. It indicates a willful ignorance about the character and integrity of many gun owners, peaceable and responsible men and women, and such a remark is the worst kind of stereotyping I've heard lately. (continued next post)
Way to go Montana. A little creative thinking happening there. I found this article, http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution...
very informative and interesting. I think they're on the right track. State sovereignty has long been under attack and I hope other states will follow suit and stand up and protect their right to make the laws concerning the people in their states with respect to guns or any other matter. (continued in next post)
I wouldn't begrudge anyone the ability to call 911 for help if they were in need. Certainly, for all the cell phones to be recycled, rather than producing new phones to give out, this would be an excellent use of them. But, I have a problem with the additional Universal Tax that I get charged on my phone line being used to provide 68 minutes of additional talk time for someone else at no charge. Writing letters still works for all other communications, or simply going in person, and it places the cost of the stamp or the transportation (bus fare, cab fare, train fare, etc) as the responsibility of the individual not the collective users who are paying for their own services.
Jesus said, "The poor you will have with you always," and we have a responsibility for meeting those basic needs, food, clothing shelter etc., even going the second mile. But I have a problem with those monies providing talk time to even those few who might use them for drug deals, running scams, or other illegal activities. Call 911, sure, but let them budget from the funds they already receive to buy prepaid cards like everyone else.
I'm not on a particular party list . . . but this is a great idea!
Hmm. That's an interesting thought. Personally, though I belong to no one particular party I voted for the Constitutional Party candidate in the 2008 election. We also need to let those universities or other venues hosting debates know that they need to invite more than just the two big-party candidates. I mean, if they're really wanting to foster debate and make sure all views are represented ALL the candidates need to be present and heard!.
KCMO tea party was great. Here are some pics I took. <a href="http://wwtimes.blogspot.com/2009/04/kansas-city-m...
Thanks. I know military folks and they're good at problem solving. The Border Patrol would surely benefit from their presence and their support. Then we just have to get our government to apply the funds they previously sent to Mexico to our own Border Patrol and military and we would see a large decrease in trafficking.
Someone call on China then. Tell them to forget the cheap plastic imports. We want The Great Wall. The problem with illegal immigration is we tend to forget it's not just Mexico, though that probably accounts for the greatest portion. It's also those who come legally but then thumb their noses at our laws and remain illegally. I still say we put our military installations on the northern and southern borders and fence them. They cross those fences and they're invaders. The military deals with them. As far as the census, it's invasive and unnecessary and it should go. There should be a better way of determining representation than by a grossly flawed resource like the U.S. Census.