Interacting with patients and their families each day is one of the best things about my job. I certainly see the whole spectrum of people, their concerns, questions, and yes...even jokes. It's especially interesting to hear the theories of parents on their kid's new need for glasses. I have seen many Moms for instance, who confindently assume the video games their son plays are responsible for the new need for specs. TV, and computer also often get tagged by parents confident... or desperate, to get their kid away from the unfavorable activities. (What's interesting is reading is never questioned). People see a negative, or perceived negative outcome, like their kid needing glasses, and quickly form a cause for the outcome that fits their agenda. I don't mean to rip on my patients. Seeing cause and effect relationships that benefit us in some way is human nature, and a concept any married person can certainly relate to. (Shell, did you know watching HGTV instead of sportcenter causes breast cancer?....Don't believe me? Go ahead and survey breast cancer patients and see which channel they watch more of!!!)
Ladies and Gentlemen, global warming is no different! I acknowledge the earth does seem to be warming slightly (less than a degree Celcius in the last 100 years), but to assume it is caused by mankind's activities is about as ridiculous as my HGTV example.Watching Gore's propagandumentery was the best piece of pick and choose your evidence work i've ever seen. First off, has anyone ever heard of the ice age? I'd have to look it up, but I could swear it happened a few years before SUV's were invented. News flash Al Gore, the earth has proven it's capable of MASSIVE climate change without any human input.....well caveman input I guess. Actually Gore does mention the previous ice ages, but of course THIS round of climate change is different! The scare tactics abound in this film. For one, Gore not so subtly suggests that every natural disaster can be blamed on human activity. For instance he mentions that rencently, Japan had 10 typhoons in 1 year, the highest number ever! That statistic is true, BUT he left out the very important caveat that the lower pacific regions, including the Phillipines, had many fewer typhoons, they just simply shifted more north that year. Of course the melting of Kilamanjaro is blamed on global warming too. The problem with this claim is Kilamanjaro like many other midlatitude glaciers,have been declining for well over a century. And Hurricane Katrina being mankind's fault? I remember in school learning about something called the scientific method....I thought there were certain steps required before a claim became a theory, let alone dramatic claims with no evidence becoming a theory. But why bother with theory even it all? Just skip theory and go straight to calling it fact, then denounce any skeptic to that so called fact as an ignorant, big oil sell out. That's alot funner! Back to the actual warming. That staggering 1 degree rise in the last 100 years is actually basically linear. That is, it raised as much from 1900 to about 1950 as it has from 1950 till now, despite that fact our "carbon output" has skyrocketed in the last 50 years. In fact, even according to Gore's graphs, temperature rises actually preceded CO2 elevation on certain occasions. Yeah i'm thinkin the whole carbon output=rise in CO2 levels=global warming equation has just a few holes in it. Any theory this emotionally charged so low on actual evidence to back it up just screams "agenda."
But let's get back to the evidence....or lack thereof. If a few scientists scream the sky is falling, do we take them at their word? Well they were sure screaming a few decades back. The funny thing is, not only were they singing a different tune, but the exact opposite tune. These "never wrong" scientists came out with a global cooling scare in the 1970's. You heard me right, cooling. (TAKE A FEW SECONDS AND GOOGLE "GLOBAL COOLING 1975" and read the Newsweek article listed. I dunno, sounds pretty convincing to me....) Why the change in scare tactic.. errr.....temperature? I guess "warming" sounds a little more terrifying (unless of course, you live in Utah presently, then warming sounds pretty good).
You would think from listening to Hollywood stars (who are experts on climatology by the way), and the rest of the media, that everyone who's anyone is on board with the theory, but the fact is there is ALOT of disagreement from climatologists on the subject (meteorologist and founder of the Weather Channel John Coleman for one). But, just like Mother Earth, the dissenters are sure feeling the heat. How would it be to have some of your fellow peers, and supposed unbiased journalist tell you you're the eqivalent of a Holocaust denier if you don't endorse the global warming movement? Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe claimed just that. Then there's Heidi Cullen, a climatologist from the Weather Channel, who suggested that any of her collegues who dissent should lose their certification from the American Meteorological Society! Despite the pressure, many respected scientist do not put their rubber stamp on this ridiculous theory. Sanity is not dead!
Why then, have so many jumped on board? I think it's the garbage can effect. Let me explain; Today when I got home from work, I noticed the garbage can I took to the curb that morning was still full. It was then that I realized garbage day was tomorrow. The funny thing was, so many people had their cans out. My guess is, the neighbor saw us take our can out and thought, "I'm not certain they're right, but better safe than sorry, so I will too." Then, when our other neighbor sees two cans out, then it must be so....and so on and so on. As scary as it sounds, some people can see a blurb on the news, a celebrity or two cry "the sky is falling," and when a friend mentions "we just gotta stop global warming,", they think...."uhhh, yeah, yeah WE DO!)." Phenomonons can spread, for cryin out loud look how popular the Back Street Boys got!
So what's the big deal if mankind isn't actually causing global warming? What's the harm in people believing a bogus theory, especially if it motivates them to help clean the earth? First off, there are many global warming advocates...of say the Hollywood/Washington variety, who aren't really doing a whole lot to clean the earth. Mr. Gore's house for instance, consumes about 20 times that of the average American home. The hypocrisy of the messanger certainly doesn't negate the message, but it is worth noting. Secondly, there isn't a global warming skeptic out there who doesn't want clean air and water. To suggest that anyone who doesn't jump on the global warming band wagon wants polluted rivers and air is a little far fetched...even for this crowd. We owe it to our children to leave the earth better than we inherited it, and companies aren't just working for a better planet out of genuine concern, but also to protect their image. However noble or "greedy" their intentions are, the fact is a whole lot is being done, and will continue to be done to clean the planet...whether or not global warming is real. Yes there are scumbags out there still polluting the earth, but us nbelievers are working hard for a clean planet too!
The real reason the global warming movement is so scary is that it's gonna cost you-big time!
New Zealander's already pay an environmental tax with their electric bill. The Governator Arnold Scheiowroamomlrezz is pushing a similar program in California. John Mccain, the uhhhhh Republican guy for prez, proposed a roughly 30 cent hike tax on each gallon of gas to combat global warming. Startin' to hold some real relevence for ya now, isn't it? To further explain, what if I told you carrots do indeed help your eyes, but you need to buy the exotic, Andes grown carrots of South America, or you could go blind!!!! It's not hard to see that some people (South American carrot farmers for instance) would benefit from this, and have a vested interest in propagating this theory, while our own American carrot growers would be harmed as this "movement" gained momentum. Once you start looking at the economic ramifications of a theory, i'd say it becomes pretty darn stinkin important if it's real or not, and there may be people who become less intrested in the truth, and more interested in the momentum! This concern was voiced in a January 9th article in the New York Times, The article details the concern of the Federal Trade commission on certain companies profiting so heavily from carbon offset programs (some 54 million dollars last year alone..and i'm a conservative, I like profits....in this case however.....). Anyway, the article states: With the rapid growth of green programs like carbon offsets, "there’s a heightened potential for deception," said Deborah Platt Majoras, chairwoman of the commission. Yeah, no kidding.
At the risk of sounding like a paranoid, conspiracy theorist, there is a deeper problem with the global warming theory. On an international level, worthless organizations like the UN have consistently used Global Warming to leverage policies that directly harm the US economy. Basically, in a not-so-sublte way, the international folks are suggesting that wealthy, carbon emmitters should essentially shut down their industrial machine to stop evil carbon emmissions. It's not just subtle suggestions, formal treaties have been drafted so blatantly anti-American you'd have to be....(insert noun of choice here)....not to see it. Thank goodness GW Bush had the guts and the sense to reject the Kyoto treaty, which would have cost us an estimated 325 billion dollars, while hypocritically demanding nothing of China, a country who, within the next year or two will emit more greenhouse gasses then we are.
Here's the deal people. This hoax is not just annoying, it's dangerous. We can work hard to clean the planet through alternate energy programs and more earth friendly habits as personal consumers. We cannot waste billions of dollars, and agree to needlessly shut down vital parts of the American economy all to entertian the bogus notion that we control mother nature. I don't know if it'll take 5 years or 50, but eventually the chirade will come crashing down and man-made Global Warming will be revealed as the greatest hoax in world history. I just fear we'll have to endure some serious economic hardship first...... not to mention a Gore sequel: An inconvenienter truth...please, no!
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
A case for conservatism
All right, so I know i've ranted on about being a conservative in my earlier blogs, but just in case people still think me and other right-wing wackos are brainwashed Rush Limbaugh clones, then you just......wait until after his program tomorrow when I can find out from him what to say about that!
OK, in all seriousness, I do rip on the left, but I have great respect for many good Democrats. You might say there's several i'm very close to who I know have a great love for this country. I don't have all the answers, and the whole "the truth lies somewhere in-between" may indeed be true wisdom, but I firmly believe the principles of conservatism are the strength of this country, and that Democrats are the poster children for the well-intentioned who are doing more harm than good. That said, let me make my case.
Essentially, it comes down to the deep-rooted principles held on either side. When I say deep, I mean what the movements really stand for, not just what we hear on the surface. Politicians use stupid scare tactics, half-truths, and good ol spin to get people arguing and focusing on the debate itself, instead of the core issues. Democrats aren't traitors and Republicans don't hate poor and minorities, sorry to ebb the adrenaline flow of anyone ready to duke it out, but those are the facts. Most people in both parties are great Americans. I really believe that, but the PRINCIPLES behind Conservativism are what makes this country great, and the liberal/Democratic agenda, while well intentioned, is flat out harmful. You gotta look at what message your message, or agenda, is really conveying. In other words, you have to look deeper than the words, to the real message beneath.
For instance, Conservatives believe in low taxes, limited goverment, a strong defense, are generally pro-life, and favor harsher punishments for criminals. But on a deeper level, what it really means is they believe in personal responsibility, and that there are consequences for one's decisions; that freedom does not come from the government, but that it's the government's job to preserve the people's God given freedom. (In fact, all governments gradually take freedom away, some just do it more slowly than others).
Liberals on the other hand, believe in higher taxes, seperation of church and state way beyond what the constitution intended (i'll explain later), more often than not are pro-choice and favor lighter punishment for criminals in general. Liberalism, simply put, threatens prosperity and ultimately, freedom. It directly conflicts with core principles like innovation, responsiblity, acheivement, and self-reliance. In the end, it even puts government over God. It's no coincidence all communist countries shun religion. If people truly rely on themselves and their God, the government becomes less important, less powerful. Here are some specific examples contrasting the two very different schools of thought.
CONSERVATISM REWARDS PROGRESS AND ACHEIVEMENT, LIBERALISM PUNISHES IT. You need only to contrast the tax philosophies of the two parties to see this. People making 100,000 or more pay 80% of the taxes in this country, yet when a tax cut comes up for debate, you'd think conservatives were asking the less fortunate to sell their oldest child and give the proceeds to the nearest millionaire. The fact is, Democrats think the answer to all economic problems is to tax the "rich". In other words, the message is "if you're working hard and making a decent living for yourself, you don't really deserve it, and if you're not self-sustaining, you don't have to pick yourself up and get an education or a job, the government will just take care of you". Can we not see the inherent danger in this?
First off, most upper-middle class, in fact, most millionaires in this country did not find their better fortune through inheritence or luck, but through hard work, education, and wise spending and investing. Ask any financial adviser, and part of their little presentation explains this in great detail. Second, high taxes hurt the middle class, especially the small business owner. And folks, the small business owner IS the economic backbone of this nation. When they have more money in their pocket, and corportations have more money, it creates jobs. THAT is how you truly help the poor. Those struggling in society are never raised up by pushing everyone else down. Think of the country more like an elevator and less like a scale. Democrats, I hope you can understand that it's the upper and upper middle class that create the jobs for others. Punishing the wealthier citizens and corporations just does not work long term and about the worst thing you could do for this country econmocially.
CONSERVATISM REINFORCES PERSONAL RESPONSIBLITY, LIBERALISM DESTROYS IT
Recently, laws were enacted in New York to ban trans fats. In other words, it's not your fault you're a fatty on the verge of a heart attack, it's Nabiscos! I site this example because it reveals two BIG ways the liberal agenda threatens our nation: 1) Trying to have the government make your desisions for you (in this case what you can and can't eat), and 2) When something bad happens to you, there's always someone else to blame. The fact is, sometime no one's to blame.
Tell that to John Edwards, the epitomy of liberalism. The guy made his fortune off suing doctors who delivered children with Cerebral Palsy. He convinced juries that if Doc's had only performed a C-section earlier in the pregnancy, the kid wouldn't have that horrible condition. There was never any evidence for this, in fact his wack theory has since been disproven, but not before many physicians were financially ruined and malpractic insurance for OB/GYN skyrocketed. The greatest tragedy in all of this is however, is the message that it sends, to the parents and the public in general. Disclaimer: I am not a fan of malpractice attourneys. Yes there are Doctors and companies out there who really screw up, and they need to be held accountable, but what malpractice attourneys are doing to the country and it's litigation addiction is what the liberal agenda is more subtely doing to the nation, dissolving personal responsiblity. Remember the McDonald's customer who got millions for spilling hot coffee on herself? Please, make it stop!
As ugly as it sounds, the fact is a core principle of the liberal movement is erasing consequences of behavior. I've already mentioned poverty/taxes and litigation (the trial lawyer association is the single largest contributor to the Democratic party by the way), but we're just getting started. It's also no coincidence that Liberals are basically in lock-step with the Pro-Choice movement. Pro choice is a very sugar-coated way to say, "killing your unborn child to take away all consequences of your behavior".
The consequence erasing doesn't stop there, liberals are notorious for their empathy for the worst members of our society. Rapists, murderers, child molesters, ruthless dictators....according to liberals, they're not monsters, they're just misunderstood. Take good ol' Massachusetts, probably the most liberal state in the union. They were recently in the news for developing a field trip program for convicted sex offenders. I could ALMOST stomach it if the field trip was say, to a museum, or even a Celtics game, but they took them to a circus! The investigative reporter caught on tape these guys unsupervised surrounded by kids. It truly boggles the mind. Want another example? Take Roberston, Boyd, and Horton for instance. These are 3 guys you've probably never heard of, but they were all violent criminals who murdered people AFTER they were put behind bars. Mike Dukakis, a liberal who ran for Prez in 88 released these scumbags from prison throught the furlogh program, which basically let criminals out in society for the weekends to find a job, interact with society, and...you know....replay the good ol' times by Mudering on their weekend out on the town. The liberals incessant urge to pardon the undeserving at the expense of innocent Americans is almost difficult to comprehend.....that is, until you understand the deeper principles of the party.
UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE: HEY EVERYBODY....IT'S FREE!!
I could go on forever about the distastrous idea of universal health care, (which is anything but free in reality) In case you hadn't heard, free market capitalism ALWAYS makes a higher quality product and is more efficient than the Government. I have 6 letters for you: DMV, and IRS. The reason the free market works is simple, the right motivation drives it: profit! If you don't produce a high quality product, and do so efficiently at minimal, or at least acceptable cost to you, someone else will and you'll be gone! Look at electronics. When they first came out, VCR's were like $30,000! I exaggerate, but crazy expensive, but things get better, and cheaper. If Sony makes a good VCR, then JVC knows they've got to make one just as good, or even better! We think TV's, couches, and hamburgers when someone says product, but healthcare is a product too, and if you take capitalism out of the picture and put the government in charge, we are in a world of hurt.
Yes there are major problems with the current system, but the free market, not the government, holds the answer. If your NBA team is losing, you may need to fire the coach, but you don't replace him with a football coach, because the core principles of the game are still valid, they just weren't being done right. Likewise, just because problems exist in our healthcare system in the free market, you don't abandon it for Government run healthcare. In fact, football coach is a bad analogy. The government running health care would be more like a piano teacher coaching an NBA team. Bad, bad idea.
This should not be a revelation to anyone who actually does a little homework, especially since our friends in Europe and Canada already went down the foolish universal health care road. In Britain they actually have policies in place in the hospitals to no longer change bedding between patients to try and cut costs! And there's many more horror stories like that one, despite what Michael Moore says.
Low quality care isn't the only problem, there's also the accessabilty problem. For example: If the government came out tomorrow and said "gas is now 10 cents a gallon," can you imagine the lines at the pump? That's about how it is; the average wait list for a hip replacement in Canada is MONTHS.Many Canadians actually go to Michigan and other bordering US states for care, even though it means paying for procedures out of pocket, just to have the opportunity to get treated ...sometime in their lifetime! Once again, sounds good on the surface, but insert ANY logic whatsoever into the equation and this liberal idea, like every other, reveals it's true colors.
In conclusion....yes I am actually going to conclude, I'd like you to ponder a couple other things. I believe conservative ideas and principles not only make sense, but ring true to the majority of those who really listen to and study them. Conversely, liberal ideas make great headlines and talking points for campaigning politicians, but going into them in depth reveals their true colors and turns many away. It is for this reason I believe, that conservative talk radio thrives while liberal talk radio can't get off the ground. Liberal Air America was actually jumpstarted by funding in the millions, with celebrities like Jenneane Garofollo and Al Franken on the mic, and it died, along with MANY, MANY other attempts, while conservative talk radio continues to thrive across the whole country. In case you want to argue Conservatives are just radio junkies, we've got the corner on books as well. For every dollar earned by a liberal best seller, at least 3 come in on the conservative side. Fox News, which is weakly conservative at best, but the most right-leaning of all news networks, consistently leads in the ratings. I don't mean to sound like a cocky fan blurting my teams's statistics. It isn't a competition, but it is a revealing statistic that says something about the real strength of the message. So here's the meat and potatoes: Ultimately, The Liberal message is that we need the Government to take care of us, that the system is rigged for the greedy priveledged, that problems can be blamed on someone else, and our fate is largly tied to what the government can do for you and not from the consequences of your own behavior. Conversely, Conservatism is positive. Fundamentally, it tells you that you can succeed. By making wise choices, such as hard work, an education, and basic principles of responsibility and drive, anyone can experience the American Dream.
OK, in all seriousness, I do rip on the left, but I have great respect for many good Democrats. You might say there's several i'm very close to who I know have a great love for this country. I don't have all the answers, and the whole "the truth lies somewhere in-between" may indeed be true wisdom, but I firmly believe the principles of conservatism are the strength of this country, and that Democrats are the poster children for the well-intentioned who are doing more harm than good. That said, let me make my case.
Essentially, it comes down to the deep-rooted principles held on either side. When I say deep, I mean what the movements really stand for, not just what we hear on the surface. Politicians use stupid scare tactics, half-truths, and good ol spin to get people arguing and focusing on the debate itself, instead of the core issues. Democrats aren't traitors and Republicans don't hate poor and minorities, sorry to ebb the adrenaline flow of anyone ready to duke it out, but those are the facts. Most people in both parties are great Americans. I really believe that, but the PRINCIPLES behind Conservativism are what makes this country great, and the liberal/Democratic agenda, while well intentioned, is flat out harmful. You gotta look at what message your message, or agenda, is really conveying. In other words, you have to look deeper than the words, to the real message beneath.
For instance, Conservatives believe in low taxes, limited goverment, a strong defense, are generally pro-life, and favor harsher punishments for criminals. But on a deeper level, what it really means is they believe in personal responsibility, and that there are consequences for one's decisions; that freedom does not come from the government, but that it's the government's job to preserve the people's God given freedom. (In fact, all governments gradually take freedom away, some just do it more slowly than others).
Liberals on the other hand, believe in higher taxes, seperation of church and state way beyond what the constitution intended (i'll explain later), more often than not are pro-choice and favor lighter punishment for criminals in general. Liberalism, simply put, threatens prosperity and ultimately, freedom. It directly conflicts with core principles like innovation, responsiblity, acheivement, and self-reliance. In the end, it even puts government over God. It's no coincidence all communist countries shun religion. If people truly rely on themselves and their God, the government becomes less important, less powerful. Here are some specific examples contrasting the two very different schools of thought.
CONSERVATISM REWARDS PROGRESS AND ACHEIVEMENT, LIBERALISM PUNISHES IT. You need only to contrast the tax philosophies of the two parties to see this. People making 100,000 or more pay 80% of the taxes in this country, yet when a tax cut comes up for debate, you'd think conservatives were asking the less fortunate to sell their oldest child and give the proceeds to the nearest millionaire. The fact is, Democrats think the answer to all economic problems is to tax the "rich". In other words, the message is "if you're working hard and making a decent living for yourself, you don't really deserve it, and if you're not self-sustaining, you don't have to pick yourself up and get an education or a job, the government will just take care of you". Can we not see the inherent danger in this?
First off, most upper-middle class, in fact, most millionaires in this country did not find their better fortune through inheritence or luck, but through hard work, education, and wise spending and investing. Ask any financial adviser, and part of their little presentation explains this in great detail. Second, high taxes hurt the middle class, especially the small business owner. And folks, the small business owner IS the economic backbone of this nation. When they have more money in their pocket, and corportations have more money, it creates jobs. THAT is how you truly help the poor. Those struggling in society are never raised up by pushing everyone else down. Think of the country more like an elevator and less like a scale. Democrats, I hope you can understand that it's the upper and upper middle class that create the jobs for others. Punishing the wealthier citizens and corporations just does not work long term and about the worst thing you could do for this country econmocially.
CONSERVATISM REINFORCES PERSONAL RESPONSIBLITY, LIBERALISM DESTROYS IT
Recently, laws were enacted in New York to ban trans fats. In other words, it's not your fault you're a fatty on the verge of a heart attack, it's Nabiscos! I site this example because it reveals two BIG ways the liberal agenda threatens our nation: 1) Trying to have the government make your desisions for you (in this case what you can and can't eat), and 2) When something bad happens to you, there's always someone else to blame. The fact is, sometime no one's to blame.
Tell that to John Edwards, the epitomy of liberalism. The guy made his fortune off suing doctors who delivered children with Cerebral Palsy. He convinced juries that if Doc's had only performed a C-section earlier in the pregnancy, the kid wouldn't have that horrible condition. There was never any evidence for this, in fact his wack theory has since been disproven, but not before many physicians were financially ruined and malpractic insurance for OB/GYN skyrocketed. The greatest tragedy in all of this is however, is the message that it sends, to the parents and the public in general. Disclaimer: I am not a fan of malpractice attourneys. Yes there are Doctors and companies out there who really screw up, and they need to be held accountable, but what malpractice attourneys are doing to the country and it's litigation addiction is what the liberal agenda is more subtely doing to the nation, dissolving personal responsiblity. Remember the McDonald's customer who got millions for spilling hot coffee on herself? Please, make it stop!
As ugly as it sounds, the fact is a core principle of the liberal movement is erasing consequences of behavior. I've already mentioned poverty/taxes and litigation (the trial lawyer association is the single largest contributor to the Democratic party by the way), but we're just getting started. It's also no coincidence that Liberals are basically in lock-step with the Pro-Choice movement. Pro choice is a very sugar-coated way to say, "killing your unborn child to take away all consequences of your behavior".
The consequence erasing doesn't stop there, liberals are notorious for their empathy for the worst members of our society. Rapists, murderers, child molesters, ruthless dictators....according to liberals, they're not monsters, they're just misunderstood. Take good ol' Massachusetts, probably the most liberal state in the union. They were recently in the news for developing a field trip program for convicted sex offenders. I could ALMOST stomach it if the field trip was say, to a museum, or even a Celtics game, but they took them to a circus! The investigative reporter caught on tape these guys unsupervised surrounded by kids. It truly boggles the mind. Want another example? Take Roberston, Boyd, and Horton for instance. These are 3 guys you've probably never heard of, but they were all violent criminals who murdered people AFTER they were put behind bars. Mike Dukakis, a liberal who ran for Prez in 88 released these scumbags from prison throught the furlogh program, which basically let criminals out in society for the weekends to find a job, interact with society, and...you know....replay the good ol' times by Mudering on their weekend out on the town. The liberals incessant urge to pardon the undeserving at the expense of innocent Americans is almost difficult to comprehend.....that is, until you understand the deeper principles of the party.
UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE: HEY EVERYBODY....IT'S FREE!!
I could go on forever about the distastrous idea of universal health care, (which is anything but free in reality) In case you hadn't heard, free market capitalism ALWAYS makes a higher quality product and is more efficient than the Government. I have 6 letters for you: DMV, and IRS. The reason the free market works is simple, the right motivation drives it: profit! If you don't produce a high quality product, and do so efficiently at minimal, or at least acceptable cost to you, someone else will and you'll be gone! Look at electronics. When they first came out, VCR's were like $30,000! I exaggerate, but crazy expensive, but things get better, and cheaper. If Sony makes a good VCR, then JVC knows they've got to make one just as good, or even better! We think TV's, couches, and hamburgers when someone says product, but healthcare is a product too, and if you take capitalism out of the picture and put the government in charge, we are in a world of hurt.
Yes there are major problems with the current system, but the free market, not the government, holds the answer. If your NBA team is losing, you may need to fire the coach, but you don't replace him with a football coach, because the core principles of the game are still valid, they just weren't being done right. Likewise, just because problems exist in our healthcare system in the free market, you don't abandon it for Government run healthcare. In fact, football coach is a bad analogy. The government running health care would be more like a piano teacher coaching an NBA team. Bad, bad idea.
This should not be a revelation to anyone who actually does a little homework, especially since our friends in Europe and Canada already went down the foolish universal health care road. In Britain they actually have policies in place in the hospitals to no longer change bedding between patients to try and cut costs! And there's many more horror stories like that one, despite what Michael Moore says.
Low quality care isn't the only problem, there's also the accessabilty problem. For example: If the government came out tomorrow and said "gas is now 10 cents a gallon," can you imagine the lines at the pump? That's about how it is; the average wait list for a hip replacement in Canada is MONTHS.Many Canadians actually go to Michigan and other bordering US states for care, even though it means paying for procedures out of pocket, just to have the opportunity to get treated ...sometime in their lifetime! Once again, sounds good on the surface, but insert ANY logic whatsoever into the equation and this liberal idea, like every other, reveals it's true colors.
In conclusion....yes I am actually going to conclude, I'd like you to ponder a couple other things. I believe conservative ideas and principles not only make sense, but ring true to the majority of those who really listen to and study them. Conversely, liberal ideas make great headlines and talking points for campaigning politicians, but going into them in depth reveals their true colors and turns many away. It is for this reason I believe, that conservative talk radio thrives while liberal talk radio can't get off the ground. Liberal Air America was actually jumpstarted by funding in the millions, with celebrities like Jenneane Garofollo and Al Franken on the mic, and it died, along with MANY, MANY other attempts, while conservative talk radio continues to thrive across the whole country. In case you want to argue Conservatives are just radio junkies, we've got the corner on books as well. For every dollar earned by a liberal best seller, at least 3 come in on the conservative side. Fox News, which is weakly conservative at best, but the most right-leaning of all news networks, consistently leads in the ratings. I don't mean to sound like a cocky fan blurting my teams's statistics. It isn't a competition, but it is a revealing statistic that says something about the real strength of the message. So here's the meat and potatoes: Ultimately, The Liberal message is that we need the Government to take care of us, that the system is rigged for the greedy priveledged, that problems can be blamed on someone else, and our fate is largly tied to what the government can do for you and not from the consequences of your own behavior. Conversely, Conservatism is positive. Fundamentally, it tells you that you can succeed. By making wise choices, such as hard work, an education, and basic principles of responsibility and drive, anyone can experience the American Dream.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Republicans: the wayward party
So the GOP race seems down to 2. You would think the choice for Republicans is pretty obvious, but from the Florida results you've gotta wonder what affects the sun's radiation is actually having on the good citizens of the sunshine state. In one corner you've got basically the male version of Hillary Clinton......wait, that's Bill, I mean the really old male version of Hillary. You know, the one who threatened several years back to leave the Republican party to become an independent or even a Dem, who voted against Bush's tax cuts twice, authored McCain Feingold Hint #1: M.F is to free speech what Rosie O'Donnell is to pleasant conversation. A guy who just last year, came up with amnesty as the solution to the immigration program. Hint #2: In Washington, "comprehensive" pretty much means worthless. Oh, and he's a lifelong Senator (no, that's NOT a good thing).
Contrast that with Mitt Romney. His specailty is basically gutting inefficient organizations and getting results, oh and he did that in the real world. One vital conservative principle is limited government, and this guy will limit it guaranteed. He is for tax cuts, both individual AND corporate. Hint #3, that's a GOOD thing. Let me explain for a second. Our country has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Now if you're Company X, and you could bring your operation with tons of jobs here and pay a boatload in taxes, or go overseas and pay less, what do you pick? Lower taxes only helping the rich is a big boatload of crap (and I know big boats, I'm in the Navy!). He is adament about staying on the offensive against islamic extremism. He is also for this not so radical idea called enforcing existing laws by securing our borders and... I dunno, stopping for example, the use of taxpayer money for in-state tuition breaks for illegal immigrants. Romney is the genuine article folks. A true conservative that that hasn't been seen for 20 years.
Now you probably realized by now I believe in conservatism. I truly feel that this country is the greatest in the history of the world because of it's people and the constitution, not the government. Yes government can do some good, and is necessary, but more often than not it gets in the way at best and hinders prosperity and freedom at worst. I could go on and on with statistics and rhetoric, but let me use just a couple examples. First off, if you look at wealth distribution, it has very little to do with what you were born into. The caste systems and rich-by-birthright Robin Hood times are gone. Crazy at it sounds, people succeed or fail in this nation largely because of the choices they make (for instance, having an illegitamate child is probably the single biggest factor in poverty risk, more than race-despite what the media says). People who are really hurting aren't that way because the goverment isn't doing enough, but there are people, in fact, even an entire party, that gains it's power by leading people to believe just that. Now that i've ripped on the Dems, I must say that the point of this piece is actually to rip on the right. That's right; the Republican party has been slowly going wayward since 1988, and we're looking at the point of no return now. For review: In 1980, the last true conservative, Ronald Reagan, was elected president. Now this republican actually acted like a conservative, consequently the country loved him, evidenced when he went up for reelection where he won by about the biggest landslide in history (49 of the 50 states). Since then, there's been a slow decay of conservative principles. In 88 George H took over. He was what you might call half-conservative at best...growing government...raising taxes...and he lost his reelection bid. The country then chose good ol Clinton..(note a common theme, repeated in 2006: when Republicans forget conservative principles, Democrats get elected!)I wont even go into Clintons's years, but needless to say conservatism took a back seat for awhile, except in congress. In 2000 George W takes over, but as a half...no....more like 40% conservative at best. Yes he led us wisely in the war on terror, for which I am grateful, and appointing judges to the Supreme Court with more exposure to the constitution than what they've seen on Jeopardy didn't hurt. He did lower taxes, but forgot that all important (i.e. most important) step of limiting goverment, and consequently the deficit is huge and people are a little upset. So here we are, 2008. The Crossroads of Conservatism (I should copywrite that). I may be overdramatic...in fact I HOPE somehow I am, but this Republican primary is huge, crucial, pivotal...you get the point. If we actually nominate John Mccain all hope may be lost. I've said it before, but Mitt Romney just has to win the white house this fall. Let the wayward party return!
Contrast that with Mitt Romney. His specailty is basically gutting inefficient organizations and getting results, oh and he did that in the real world. One vital conservative principle is limited government, and this guy will limit it guaranteed. He is for tax cuts, both individual AND corporate. Hint #3, that's a GOOD thing. Let me explain for a second. Our country has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Now if you're Company X, and you could bring your operation with tons of jobs here and pay a boatload in taxes, or go overseas and pay less, what do you pick? Lower taxes only helping the rich is a big boatload of crap (and I know big boats, I'm in the Navy!). He is adament about staying on the offensive against islamic extremism. He is also for this not so radical idea called enforcing existing laws by securing our borders and... I dunno, stopping for example, the use of taxpayer money for in-state tuition breaks for illegal immigrants. Romney is the genuine article folks. A true conservative that that hasn't been seen for 20 years.
Now you probably realized by now I believe in conservatism. I truly feel that this country is the greatest in the history of the world because of it's people and the constitution, not the government. Yes government can do some good, and is necessary, but more often than not it gets in the way at best and hinders prosperity and freedom at worst. I could go on and on with statistics and rhetoric, but let me use just a couple examples. First off, if you look at wealth distribution, it has very little to do with what you were born into. The caste systems and rich-by-birthright Robin Hood times are gone. Crazy at it sounds, people succeed or fail in this nation largely because of the choices they make (for instance, having an illegitamate child is probably the single biggest factor in poverty risk, more than race-despite what the media says). People who are really hurting aren't that way because the goverment isn't doing enough, but there are people, in fact, even an entire party, that gains it's power by leading people to believe just that. Now that i've ripped on the Dems, I must say that the point of this piece is actually to rip on the right. That's right; the Republican party has been slowly going wayward since 1988, and we're looking at the point of no return now. For review: In 1980, the last true conservative, Ronald Reagan, was elected president. Now this republican actually acted like a conservative, consequently the country loved him, evidenced when he went up for reelection where he won by about the biggest landslide in history (49 of the 50 states). Since then, there's been a slow decay of conservative principles. In 88 George H took over. He was what you might call half-conservative at best...growing government...raising taxes...and he lost his reelection bid. The country then chose good ol Clinton..(note a common theme, repeated in 2006: when Republicans forget conservative principles, Democrats get elected!)I wont even go into Clintons's years, but needless to say conservatism took a back seat for awhile, except in congress. In 2000 George W takes over, but as a half...no....more like 40% conservative at best. Yes he led us wisely in the war on terror, for which I am grateful, and appointing judges to the Supreme Court with more exposure to the constitution than what they've seen on Jeopardy didn't hurt. He did lower taxes, but forgot that all important (i.e. most important) step of limiting goverment, and consequently the deficit is huge and people are a little upset. So here we are, 2008. The Crossroads of Conservatism (I should copywrite that). I may be overdramatic...in fact I HOPE somehow I am, but this Republican primary is huge, crucial, pivotal...you get the point. If we actually nominate John Mccain all hope may be lost. I've said it before, but Mitt Romney just has to win the white house this fall. Let the wayward party return!
President Hinckley remembered
Shell and I were watching the funeral services today for President Gordon B. Hinckley and it was hard to believe he's gone even despite his age and knowing of his passing for several days now. In some ways he's the only prophet i've really ever known. Yes I was 19 when he became the President, but General conference during my childhood and teenage years felt more like the church at home that stole my Saturdays than the opportunity to hear the words of a living prophet. He became president right before I entered the MTC, and he's the only prophet Shell and I have had as a couple, or that our children have ever known. We are grateful for him in so many ways, but one thing stands out in particular. Because of his push for smaller temples, we were able to have the blessings of the Columbus, OH temple just 10 minutes from home, which was less of a commute to a temple than when we lived in Salt Lake! Those temples mean so much to the Saints in the mission field.
I had the opportunity to meet him for my seminary graduation in 1994 (his grandson was in our class), and I can't say anything special happened when I shook his hand, but you could see the love on his face that he had for all of us. I know he loved the people of the church and the world. I was so excited to hear him announce the Perpetual Education Fund in priesthood years ago. That program, and the vast humanitarian work the church does, is at the heart of Christian doctrine. I will always remember the counsel he gave over the years, whether stern warnings against harmful behaviors, or gentle reminders to be a little kinder to our neighbor.
I mentioned his book in my "must read list" on this sight. If anyone hasn't read it I strongly recommend it. A missionary in church today mentioned being touched by President Hinckley's example of missionary service. He related the human side of the man, a man who was discouraged and wanted to come home. His father wrote him and said "forget yourself and go to work" the Elder today posed to us: "what if he hadn't forgotten himself and gone to work almost 80 years ago?" I for one, am very grateful he did.
I had the opportunity to meet him for my seminary graduation in 1994 (his grandson was in our class), and I can't say anything special happened when I shook his hand, but you could see the love on his face that he had for all of us. I know he loved the people of the church and the world. I was so excited to hear him announce the Perpetual Education Fund in priesthood years ago. That program, and the vast humanitarian work the church does, is at the heart of Christian doctrine. I will always remember the counsel he gave over the years, whether stern warnings against harmful behaviors, or gentle reminders to be a little kinder to our neighbor.
I mentioned his book in my "must read list" on this sight. If anyone hasn't read it I strongly recommend it. A missionary in church today mentioned being touched by President Hinckley's example of missionary service. He related the human side of the man, a man who was discouraged and wanted to come home. His father wrote him and said "forget yourself and go to work" the Elder today posed to us: "what if he hadn't forgotten himself and gone to work almost 80 years ago?" I for one, am very grateful he did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)