Healthcare, Welfare, and Power

I watched an interview Greta did last night with some House member, a republican, who has been trying since August to meet with BO about healthcare reform.  He’s sent numerous letters via snail mail, numerous emails, made numerous calls.  And got nothing back.  Nothing at all.  Not even an acknowledgment.  After BO’s “my door is always open to all” speech before the joint session (better known for the “you lie!” statement made by a patriot member of Congress), this same House member sent yet another series of requests to meet with BO about healthcare.  Turns out this guy has been in the medical profession for a quarter of a century AND he’s a lawmaker on Capitol Hill.  Gee, isn’t this just the sort of thing the pre-election BO claimed he’d welcome?  The viewpoint of someone not only across the aisle but actually knowledgeable about the issue at hand?  Do you think that this guy got his audience with the liar in chief?  Nope.  So I began to wonder why. 

It’s time, I think, to reframe this whole healthcare “debate.”  We on the right are looking at this all wrong.  While we know that there are issues with our healthcare system, that it’s flawed, imperfect, and that it could be better, we need to understand that what is happening now is not about healthcare.  Not even the tiniest little wee bit.  Seriously.  They’re not “wrong” or “stubborn” or “partisan.”  They are not in the least interested in reforming our existing system (what “reform” means), they are interested in completely taking it over and rebuilding it as a nationalized, government-run system.  And yes, we know that.  We’ve all been saying that for ages, but the bottom line is that it’s not about compassion and being neighborly, and it’s absolutely NOT about healthcare.  It is not about lowering costs.  It is not about covering more people.  This is about amassing government control of our economy.  It’s about money.  It’s about power.  If we continue to let the discussion center on the wrong thing, we’ll lose.  We are losing. 

We keep responding by offering common sense solutions to the healthcare “crisis,” but these fall on deaf ears and are ignored and even denied (how often have we heard that republicans offer no solutions, want the status quo, etc.?).  We keep responding by objecting to publicly-funded abortions (which I vehemently oppose) or by complaining about cuts to Medicare, objecting to the lumping of more fiscal responsibility on the states to cover the expanded Medicaid program, and/or by arguing against the government takeover on the grounds that it is too expensive (it is), that it won’t do what they say it will (it won’t), or that it will mean higher premiums and taxes and fines for all (it will).  But here’s the rub, they know all this.  It’s not that they don’t care, it’s that in order to achieve their goal, they need to ensure that we are taxed, fined, even jailed into subservience and complete domination by the government.

This is not about lowering costs, covering more people, or even about healthcare at all.  Not one tiny bit.  If it were, there are a least six things we can do right now (not in three or four years) that will make a huge difference, expand coverage, lower costs, provide “security” for already insured or under-insured Americans, etc.  And they wouldn’t cost a fraction of a complete restructuring of our healthcare system, with its myriad government bureaucracies, panels, commissions, committees, and layers of red tape.  But these are not even being considered.  At all.  Why?

Because the goal is to take over one sixth of the economy, period.  It could as easily be the banking industry, the car industry, the student loan industry, the newspaper industry, public radio . . . oh, wait, those have all been taken over already (the last two are in the works, still, but that’s what’s going to happen).  See?  We are missing the boat completely by even entertaining this as healthcare “reform.”  We are asking the wrong questions and spending our time flailing ineffectually at smoke.

They’re not thinking about healthcare, costs, or covering more people, so why do we keep getting sucked into the sideshow?  If they wanted to lower costs or cover more people, there are quite a few things that they could do for a quarter of the money and that wouldn’t screw up coverage for the 253.4 MILLION Americans who have coverage that they like (and this number goes up every single year, more and more people are being covered, not fewer, at least not before this economic nightmare that BO and his horde have, I believe, exacerbated to instill in us blind fear and panic, allowing them to do anything at all in the hopes that they’ll “fix” it.  This tactic has been used throughout history by unethical, power-hungry tyrants, and it’s being used on us now.).  Claiming that government-run healthcare is the answer, the ONLY answer, is typical liberal thinking.

Tug the heart-strings, claim high moral ground, and then use that to oppress and control the masses.  It’s like saying that welfare is about helping poor people.  Of course it’s not.  It’s about keeping poor people of all races on the democratic voting rolls and ensuring that they have no voice (that they aren’t told to have) and that they have no prospects to better themselves.  It’s about power.  And money.  Who gets wealthy from these wonderful programs that are supposed to lift up the underprivileged?  Who has built up multi-million dollar bank accounts and live in mansions?  Certainly not the people supposedly being helped.  It’s how liberals work.  How many people ever go OFF welfare?  How many people ever go OFF food stamps?  Not too many, and when they do, they are held up as “amazing stories” and “miraculous” and “inspirational.”  You know why?  Because they did it, literally, against all odds.  The deck is stacked against the poor getting ahead or improving their socio-economic circumstance, and that’s how the libs like it.  Is it a coincidence that the number of people who do not pay income tax (they are too poor) has continually risen over the past fifty years?  That under BO, the welfare rolls have undergone a “sharp increase”?  Why is that?  If the goal is to provide opportunity and help people get ahead, why isn’t it working?  Why is the exact opposite happening?  It’s not rocket science here:  these programs are not designed to help people. If they were, their rolls would not expand each and every year.  If they were, the expanding welfare rolls would prompt serious discussion about what’s not working and what can be done.  Notice the silence? 

The bigger the government is, the more people dependent on the government, the better they can wield that power and control.  And what better way to get people dependent on the government than to take over the banking, auto, student loan, media, and healthcare industries?  Seriously?  No conservative could ever be a fascist or a totalitarian dictator because one of the dearest-held conservative beliefs is in limiting government.  Limited government means less power for those in government and less control over the people.  This entire administration’s agenda is about expanding power, increasing government control over the masses, and restricting liberty.  Healthcare is a red herring, an illusion, a means to an end, and if we keep trying to grasp onto that, we’re going to lose far more than our doctor.


16 thoughts on “Healthcare, Welfare, and Power

  1. Great Post!!! You are right. This has nothing to do with reducing health care costs. This has everything to do with power and control. These leftist politicians only care about controlling citizens' lives. That way they can control the votes also. The liberals have screwed up every other sector or department that they have taken over, so we must not let lem take over our health care.

  2. It's amazing, they aren't just going to take over 1/6th of the economy, they are going to make sure we comply or face prison time. Did you ever think you would hear such a thing in the United States–yet it's in the bill. Senators like the little porker Landrieu are selling out American's freedom for a few pieces of silver, or in this case worthless paper.

  3. @ Teresa, thanks! I think that I was thinking that somehow they might somewhere care about improving healthcare, maybe some sort of wishful thinking, but it's becoming increasingly clear to me that is the last and least of their motives here. It's frightening as hell.

    @ Trestin, heh, I like that. But once the sheep are sheared, where will the money come from to run the country? I mean, Thatcher was on to something when she said that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. We're not far from that now, with soon only half of Americans paying in to the system!

    @ BB, I don't think the good people of Louisiana are going to be fooled by that one! Anyone running against her just has to point out that she sold their freedom for a hundred million bucks. My guess is that they'd prefer their freedom. 🙂

  4. “They are not in the least interested in reforming our existing system (what “reform” means), they are interested in completely taking it over and rebuilding it as a nationalized, government-run system. And yes, we know that. We've all been saying that for ages, but the bottom line is that it's not about compassion and being neighborly, and it's absolutely NOT about healthcare…It's about money. It's about power. If we continue to let the discussion center on the wrong thing, we'll lose. We are losing.” (FS)
    A big part of the problem is that the “political class” in BOTH Parties support “government as THE solution” to virtually ALL problems.

    That's why you hear inanities like, “Once established we're stuck with it. It'll never end. Just look at all the other social programs.”

    THAT'S a statement of AFFIRMATION and complicity!

    Look, anyone with any guts can, down the road, tear out ANY system by the roots, even if a “fiscal crisis” must be ginned up to do it….and in the coming years NO “ginning up” will be needed!

    ALL Conservatives and Republicans NEED do is find the GUTS to eschew the idea of government as THE solution and simply follow the Libertarian impulse to “tear it out by the roots.”

    Yes, some people will squawk.

    Some in the political class will pay a political price….so what?! The world needs small business owners too, in fact more of them than it does members of the political class.

    The GOP has a LOT to atone for, including its scuttling of the agenda that brought to power back in 1994!

    Especially its eviscerating term limits…something the vast majority of GOP supporters wanted….they'd better turn back to a smaller government Party and soon, because they have no chance competing as “the BETTER government” Party.

    We already have one of those.

  5. Once again you're hitting the nail on the head. Seems like you must be building a house. BO is building one of cards…:)
    Also talk about the misdirect tactic could be seen on Hannity last night with the panel discussion.

  6. @ Opus, true. And it looks like they're going to do it, too, with quite a few people, including BO himself, willing to take the political hit for it and not get re-elected. He knows all too well that this is a step, and he's willing to forge the path and martyr himself for his cause.

    @ JMK, honestly, I'm not a big fan of liberatarian thought. I mean I do agree that smaller government is needed and indeed was intended for this country, but it seems to me that libertarians want to abolish all government, and that's a bit too much for me. I basically distrust people and don't really think much of them in general terms (obviously there are individual people that I like, love, and adore, but generally speaking people are not too bright, tend toward some unsavory and ugly behaviors, and are essentially not to be trusted outside the confines of some form of government).

    Libertarianism, from what I understand about it–and I'll be the first to admit I don't know much about it, has the same flaws that Marxism does . . . it counts on human nature to be all things good, generous, selfless, and mindful of the greater good. That's rot as far as I can see. Sure there are people like that, but even when they're all gathered up in some commune or cult, they're just the sheep of some leader somewhere telling them what to think, say, do, which comet to catch, that sort of thing. I think that true freedom can only be found in a limited government. No government, and you have anarchy and freaks leading the herds. Too much government and you have it ever-expanding until it eventually gobbles up every individual freedom and liberty. I think that the more moderate British branch of libertarianism is the best model around, but even that harbors some folks who want to eliminate “the state” and set up some bizarre sixties-style commune thing in which everone sings songs and works for the common good. But all parties, including republicans–as you note, contain people who don't model the mainstream thought of that party. I don't think the answer is to abolish the republican party, just to oust the RINOs from it.

    I like the idea that your right to flail your arms about stops at my nose. In other words, we should all have individual freedom, but that there needs to be a larger body to ensure that those rights are protected. We're experiencing an odd time right now, very historical, in which the libs (who are really radicals of all ilks, but mostly progs, marxists, and communists and have overrun the party and the “old” style libs haven't figured it out yet) are grabbing for more power than can be sustained by our Constitution or by our republic. If they win, our entire government, society, economy, and culture are re-written. And it won't be pretty. And it certainly won't be America.

    @ Heyman, 🙂 And ugh, I missed Hannity last night. They'll probably run it again this weekend, though, so I'll try to catch it. What happened?

  7. Once again the liberal point of view when confronted about the health care bill, oh you must be against poor people, oh you must want to get rid of social security, medicare, medicaid…blah blah blah, republicans have always stopped health care for everyone since Harry Truman. This is all the republicans fault because all Americans want this bill….

  8. @ Kid, yay! So glad you are feeling better, I've been missing you 🙂 And yes, money equals power, but more important is what they do with the money. Are they using it to control people, limit liberty, and restrict opportunity? Or are they using it to empower people, protect liberty, and enable opportunity for all? Fundamentally, I don't have a problem with paying taxes or even with some of our entitlement programs. The problem, for me, is that these programs are not being used as safety nets or as springboards to opportunity but as a way of life, and a way to disable people in every conceivable way (financially, emotionally, psychologically, and socially). They're quagmires that suck people in and drag and hold them down. This should be despised in our society, in America.

    @ Heyman, I was watching the pre-vote arguments last night on the Senate floor. I forget the Senator, a republican, who spoke just before Reid, but he stated that no one wanted to stop debate here, that they just needed to start over and come up with a truly bipartisan bill. He went on to outline the numerous Republican solutions to the health care problems. Seconds later, Reid stood up and said that the republicans have no solutions. It was mind-blowing. The speaker right before him had given the same solutions that republicans have been giving for MONTHS, and Reid declared that republicans want to maintain the status quo. Sadly, liberals believe this, even though they can hear with their own ears that republicans are offering solution after solution. I don't get it. It's like some strange mass-hypnosis (or mass stupidity).

    @ Bunni, thanks! 🙂 It stinks to high Heaven, Bunni, and I'm at a loss as to how we can possibly stop it now.

  9. This is like the sinking of the Lusitania or Pearl Harbor. IMHO, the Congress has just declared war on us the people. Time to gather, organize and turn their worthless and dangerous ass's out! All incumbents must go; starting with the democrat party one!
    The socialist/democrats have just drawn the line in the sand.
    There are no words (permissible on this wonderful blog of yours) to express my utter disgust and anger at what the Democrats have just done. They have just deceitfully voted to fleece every American citizen and start them on the path to govt dependency.

    Let the “debate” begin! They are apparently blind to the certainty that this is going to be their collective Waterloo..

  10. Hi Mal and welcome! 🙂 I certainly share your disgust and anger and raise you a heaping spoonful of fear. This is not the way for us to go, and yes, this will likely mean the end of dem control in Congress . . . but at what cost to us? And will it really mean it next year? Or do we need to wait until 2014 or after when the full effects of this start kicking in? Very troubling all the way around.

What say you?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s