Tuesday, August 25, 2009

More On Health Care (no pun intended!)



Written : Aug. 25, 2009




Proponents of HR3200 (the health care bill proposal) say that there are “myths” being propagated “out there”, implying that falsehoods are deliberately being spread by the bill’s opponents on the alternative media. They are mischaracterized as “myths”. They are in reality, concerns.



Although I haven’t read the health care bill, and probably never will read it in its entirety, I will concede “Death Panels” and illegal immigrant coverage are not included in the bill. A mandatory requirement that employers be forced into the public plan is probably not directly mentioned either, and I’m sure abortions are not stated as automatically covered in the bill’s language. However, concessions I've made in no way impede my ability to use critical thinking with regard to the bill.



Critical thinking. Something we all must have to make sure we use so we are not oppressed by our government (or others). Something the Democrats were screaming about during all of George W. Bush’s two terms in office. Something I was taught by my wonderful - and radical - parents to protect me against future tyrants who might erode my freedom later in life. So let’s get to it!



The bill begins by talking about “acceptable” requirements for health care. These are: affordable coverage, essential benefits, and consumer protection. Nice ideals. But don’t we have the obligation to ask how those ideals will be paid for? Which programs will legislators cut? We should consider it. Our officials say we will be allowed to retain our “current” health care plan. But what if our employer, looking to cut costs for its own benefit, forces us to a cheaper solution? I’ve seen it happen every single year since I’ve had coverage! And, that’s with a couple of large companies! Such a track record leads me to believe that each employer will choose the cheapest option, and we will eventually not have a choice. As a consequence, we will be left with only the public option and private insurance companies will go out of business. What about all the jobs which will be inevitably lost as a result?



If every employer chooses the cheaper option as I predict, the private companies are done for, right? I know, I know, it doesn’t specifically state such a thing in the bill, but isn’t it the logical conclusion? This is only one point and there are dozens more. We need to watch out for proponents of the bill brushing aside our concerns by stating that our sensible conclusions concerning HR3200 are “not in the bill”. We realize they probably are not in the bill. However, critical thinking tells us about the huge problems which might result from the bill’s passage.



Health care for everyone is a nice idea. But, with the same number of doctors and infrastructure, how will we cover 40+ million more people without sacrificing quality of care? Are we not supposed to ask such questions? Are we home grown terrorists (Timothy McVae types) if we come to the town halls to make our voices heard? So, ok, call me a radical.



I invite you to read the entire bill at: Read H.R.3200 . CSPAN will have a debate (happening now) hosted by Rep. James Moran (D-VA) and former DNC Chairman Howard Dean from Reston, VA shortly. Watch it here: Watch the debate



BLOG ROLL



Scott Martin #1


Scott Martin #2


Merlin


Murphy Klasing




Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative, blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, conservative blog, conservative blogs, Health Care Reform



Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", "conservative blog", "conservative blogs", "Health Care Reform”




ConList - Best Conservative Blogs on the Internet
Conservative Blog

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

The Least Important Affair



Written : Aug. 18, 2009




Senator John Edwards (D-NC) was caught in an illicit affair in 2007-2008 just after Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared the Republicans a “culture of corruption”. The media, with the exception of the National Enquirer in July of 2008, knew that a story was brewing with Edwards, but looked the other way. For me this matters only because Edwards was a public figure. But we’re all human. Anyone, given the right circumstances can be guilty of such a transgression. Such matters belong to no political party. And, no two situations are the same, but the media has an obligation to treat each instance in a similar manner.



Early in 2009 Governor Mark Sanford (R-SC) was caught in an illicit affair. No one covered it up, and the media jumped all over the story. Sanford was a public figure and therefore the story was important. It can happen to anyone, of course. In politics, the list could include Congressmen, Senators, Governors, Presidents, etc.



On “The O’Reilly Factor” with Bill O’Reilly within the past couple of days, Linda Stasi argued vehemently that Sanford’s affair was a more important mistake – even though Edwards’ affair occurred while he was running for the U.S. presidency. In fact, Edwards was a more prominent figure than Sanford. Stasi dismissed Edwards’ affair while correctly pointing out he was a former Senator at the time. A sitting Governor was more important to highlight, more prominent than a former Senator. I disagree, but ok. This may be a bit of a stretch, but it struck me as funny how just last year the media fell in love with a Senator (Obama), while they attacked a Governor (Palin). Whichever is more convenient if it fits your political ideology, I guess. We, the public, have an obligation to be skeptical about all the pundits we watch, to think for ourselves, and to ask pertinent questions.



Read the transcript at: Read Stasi on O’Reilly There’s a link there entitled “Click here to watch the debate!” or, watch it now: Watch the debate




BLOG ROLL



Scott Martin #1


Scott Martin #2


Merlin


Murphy Klasing




Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative, blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, conservative blog, conservative blogs, Governor Sanford, Governor Palin



Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", "conservative blog", "conservative blogs", "Governor Sanford”, “Governor Palin”, “Senator Edwards”




ConList - Best Conservative Blogs on the Internet
Conservative Blog

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

1984 - All Over Again



Written : Aug. 11, 2009




In 1948, George Orwell wrote his frightening novel, 1984, which suggested government would be meddling in our lives in ways we could never have imagined before. By the way, to come up with the title, Orwell simply reversed the last two digits of the then current year.



I can tell you Orwell’s book scared my politically radical parents to death. They envisioned a scenario in which right-wingers would conspire to craft sneaky ways to revise history and modify the English language for their own sinister purpose. One method for suppressing the people was to limit deep thought and personal expression by the forced substitution of certain words for others. Tight-fisted laws regarding word usage would be put in place to weaken the people and to make them more submissive. My parents hated the idea of censorship and my left-wing dad always told me I’d notice the first hint of a totalitarian regime in America when I notice people’s freedoms being reduced as we’re told what we can and cannot say or think.



Surprise! It’s the left, instead, which has implemented the policy my parents feared most. Fast forward to 2009. Textbook companies are being lobbied by left-wing groups to change the lingo in their tools of learning for the purpose of influencing social policy.



Tucker Carlson appeared on Fox & Friends (not on CNN, on Fox News Channel!) on July 29, 2009 and on August 6, 2009. In two different segments, he outlined the words and some phrases which will soon be forbidden. Big brother is coming.



The first is “Founding Fathers”. Instead we must use, “The Founders” or “The Framers”. This is because the first phrase is too male oriented! You’ll notice there’s a common theme to all of this censorship. Carlson said we wouldn’t want to suggest the men who wrote the Constitution were men! It would be historically accurate – but SCARY!



We must not use the words chairman and chairwoman. Those are sexist. Instead please say that they are pieces of furniture, or chairs. Do not say or write the word Congressman, in its place we’ll use “Member of Congress”. Examine the other words, fisherman, brotherhood, fellowship, freshman, workmanship, caveman. Notice the similarities – see how they suggest “male” and leave out “female”? - They actually don’t, those words were used without objection while I was growing up and their use was generic (the words meant male and/or female – the same words were never perceived as sexist before. Changes such as these are proposed because some people are horrified by generic words, such as “actor”! They want to sterilize our language of words they misperceive as insults. Be careful, this is censorship, or at least an attempt to change the way people express themselves in order to influence our sense of fairness and equality concerning the sexes. It strikes me as silly and petty. Why are people so sensitive these days, really?



You can watch one of Tucker Carlson’s appearances on Fox & Friends at the following link: Tucker Carlson on Fox & Friends E-mail me at mark.marj57@comcast.net to tell me what you think. If I get enough responses I’ll post them next week. If not, ok, but you know this is censorship and it shouldn’t be happening.




BLOG ROLL



Scott Martin #1


Scott Martin #2


Merlin


Murphy Klasing




Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative, blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, conservative blog, conservative blogs, censorship, 1984, Orwell



Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", "conservative blog", "conservative blogs", " censorship”, “1984”, “Orwell”.




ConList - Best Conservative Blogs on the Internet
Conservative Blog

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Health Care vs. The Health Insurance Debate



Written : Aug. 1, 2009




The health care debate is about insurance for health care, or coverage, it's not about health care itself. We have the best health care in the world in the U.S., bar none. This is not disputed, and the evidence is apparent. For instance, if anyone goes to the emergency room they are treated right away, regardless of who they are and regardless of which insurance they do or do not have. People flock to this country to be treated but few Americans travel to countries which feature socialized medicine for care.



House of Representatives' Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has a daughter, Jackie Kucinich, who appeared on CSPAN's Washington Journal on July 29,2009. Ms. Kucinich works for Roll Call, which professes to offer unbiased online and print coverage of American national politics. The appearance by Ms. Kucinich on CSPAN on July 29 also appeared to have been unbiased, kudos to her. Libby Casey, a member of Alaska Public Radio was the guest host on July 29. While I do not yet understand the relationship between each state's public broadcasting network (ex. Colorado Public Radio) and National Public Radio, or NPR, I do know from personal experience that NPR appears to be unbiased, but it leans to the left.



Back to the debate. The political left tells us there are 50 million uninsured in the U.S. It's their right to have insurance, so how will we cover them? It's a matter of fairness at any cost for the left. The issue as seen from the right questions why we need to spend $1-2 trillion or more in future taxes or "stimulus" to clean up health care insurance issues since there are many other ways to do it. The right also questions the 50 million number (it's usually stated as 47 million) and brings to a part of the debate the question of whether or not the millions of people here illegally in the country (estimated from 7-20 million) should be counted as uninsured. The right wonders if the millions of people who do not pay for insurance should be covered, or paid for, by the tax payers?



Libby Casey, the host, referred to the issue several times as "health care". When it's framed that way, conservatives can appear to be the 'bad guys', especially when they are accused of being against "health care". The issue should be referred to by any of its' rightful names instead, such as "health care reform", "health care debate", or "the health care insurance bill". As Ms. Kucinich pointed out in a fair and unbiased manner, Republicans DO NOT want to kill "health care", since we all have great health care already. The Republicans, or conservatives, just take a different approach to reform. Their version is based on tax cuts - the opposite of taxes imposed - and making the industry healthier via cleaning up waste in the system. Conservatives in general look at the public insurance option and think it will undercut private health care insurance, thereby eliminating it in the long run. They also look at the long wait for service in other countries and are put off by the idea that a calculation is usually made as to whether or not it's cost effective to treat patients based upon the estimated survivability of a patient.



Please be careful how you refer to the debate. It's not about health care. It's about insurance.



BLOG ROLL



Scott Martin #1


Scott Martin #2


Merlin


Murphy Klasing




Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative, blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, conservative blog, conservative blogs, health care



Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", "conservative blog", "conservative blogs", "health care”.




ConList - Best Conservative Blogs on the Internet
Conservative Blog