The Last Stand? Only if Obama Chooses.

The left is circling the wagons, the right smells blood for the first time in a long time, and every side is hyping tomorrow night's address as the best and last hope for a successful Obama Presidency(in political terms, not factual).

Hold that thought.

The comparisons to the current healthcare debate to Clinton's effort in 93' have been used to the point of exhaustion by news analysis across the networks. Is Obama not being forceful enough with Congress as many in his party now whisper? Yet, Clinton is considered to have been too dictatorial towards Congress with Hillarycare.
Another complaint from the left is the back room deals made with prominent drug companies to secure their support for the healthcare push. Yet, such resistance from the drug companies is seen as being crucial for the defeat of Clinton's attempt in 93.

The fact is Obama is either not willing or unable due to paralysis from his party to have a truly bi-partisan bill become law. There is broad support for ending pre-existing conditions as a barrier to coverage, broad support outside the DNC headquarters for tort reform, and even a decent majority willing to support a healthcare bill that makes the billing process more transparent between doctors, patients, and insurance companies.

Unfortunately, such reforms can only be made possible with a closely divided Congress instead of a supermajority dem controlled. Like Clinton did with balanced budgets and welfare reform, Obama would be able to pass truly good legislation on healthcare in such an environment. Regulation sells, takeover doesn't. Unless the President is willing to sacrifice the sacred cow of public option/trigger/co-op, he won't get either. A successful Presidency after 10'and re-election depends on it.

Comfort

Is freedom is too much of a burden for us now? Should we us create a government that easies the pain of liberty in favor of the sweet silence of national socialism. How can one ever be truly free anyway? Freedom to vote, then you are free to be uninformed and not participate. Free to make a living, slave to the need of making a living. Free to choose one's health care, a slave to the need of health care. Have the ability to advance yourself with an education? You now are bound to the obligation to make something of yourself.

The debate between statism/progressivism, and libertarianism/conservatism boils down not to simply tyranny or freedom, but what kind of freedom do you what? To be free to make your own choices in life and be able to fail or succeed based on your own decisions, effort, and determination, or be free from the dangers such an undertaking inevitably create. It is not comtorable to be free, it hurts. Bad. You will fail, be taken advantage of, ignored, and even die trying to make your mark in this life. However, I still believe it is best for us all and thus our government to take that risk, let the people keep their right to succeed or fail. Many people have died in one form of bondage since man was put on this earth, very few have done so with the choice to live as they see fit. America is a people that once chose to triumph and fall through that risk. I hope we have not traded the chance of failure for the guarantee of bondage.

Problems with America

Right now America is in a crisis. I don't even watch that much t.v. and I know that the economy kinda sucks right now. I also know that the U.S. government is doing what it thinks is right by throwing money at the problem and working hard to fix it (while I do not agree with their philosophy, I do actually believe that at least some politicians are out to help the people). How did we get to this point in America? We got here because there were people in banks in America who said "Lend money to people that we know will default on their loans and then we can take advantage of them." Believe or not that is exactly what a lot of banks did. The problems with this are inherent. First, banks were (and probably are) blatantly ripping off the American people with no concern for anyone's welfare (other than their own). Second, they are setting up a system that causes people to become impoverished. And finally they are creating a system in which they will eventually go down because they lent out money that cannot be paid back because too many people defaulted on their loans.

So what does this have to do with religion (which I mentioned at the beginning of article)? So glad you asked. Here's the thing. Whether you accept it or not our country was founded by people who absolutely believed in the Christian God. I cannot say irrevocably that the founding fathers were absolute Christians, but they did believe in God. They set up our government with a Christian mindset. The thing about capitalism is that without Christianity it simply does not work. The fact that banks have taken advantage of the American people like they have demonstrates that with no morality capitalism simply becomes a system where the rich CAPITALIZE on those with less. Some might say that any religious system would do. I will disagree with this because of my religious beliefs. And you are free to disagree with me. The point here is that for a system such as ours to work in the favor of the majority there must be a moral code of ethics that says "People are what is important." More importantly than that though is that there must be a code of ethics that says "Others are more important than ME".

This past year the presidential election was held (if you didn't notice). Obama ran a campaign that focused in on Hope. Hope for the American people that we could get out of this mess that we have gotten ourselves into. That's all well and good. But throwing money at a problem that involves a lack of money doesn't seem like a wise decision to me. The thing is that true hope is found in Jesus Christ and that hope is eternal. The only problem is that America today is sick and tired of hearing about the hope that Christ has to offer. They have decided that a hope that seems more tangible is the way to go. But WHY? What happened to the greatest message that the world has ever heard to make people not want to hear it? Christians happened to it. Many Christians feel like they are Christians and that they should have perfect lives and they ignore those in desperate need of the hope that true Christianity is all about. The real problem in that is that they feel the need to live perfect lives. So while they may be having major issues with their wife at home, they go to church each Sunday and pretend that everything is perfect. Many Christians come off as fake and way too happy. It doesn't seem like a lot of Christians really live in the same world as everyone else. And some of those that take the time to look at the world see a place that is evil and full of Satan instead of a world that is broken in need of healing. It's no wonder that most people see Christians as hypocritical. It's no wonder that people turned to a political leader for HOPE. Hope that should have been provided to the people by Jesus and through His Church.

I know this is ridiculously long and if you stuck with it for this long thank you (I am almost done). Here's the whole purpose of this thing: Jesus Christ is where true hope comes from and without him and what he brings there is no hope for our nation. I know everyone isn't going to believe this but the fact of the matter is that nations have fallen time after time because of a lack of morality. In my opinion (and what is in fact Truth whether you like it or not) Jesus is the only way for true morality to thrive. The reason that we have problems with Muslims has little to do with the fact that we are "a Christian nation" but the fact that they believe us to be immoral and completely corrupt. Once morality becomes something that is not absolute people begin taking advantage of others and then everything goes to crap. So my final thoughts on this matter for now are these. Christians: ACT LIKE CHRIST!!!! Seriously, if we would Love as Christ loved then maybe, just maybe, we can change the minds of those who have written Him off because of His stupid followers. Non-Christians: Don't judge all Christians based on your experiences with a few, most, or all of the ones that you have interacted with. I know that that is difficult, but the thing is Jesus was actually a really cool guy and he actually does love you whether or not His followers always demonstrate it. I know it seems ridiculous but it's true.

Obama... Why?

When John McCain considers taxing health benefits, it's worthy of a political ad...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07PCWZEYZO4

Then, when several current healthcare plan proposals include taxing certain people's health benefits, you're not as vocal? No denouncing the idea with an "I approve this message."

Am I not justified in worrying about all of these healthcare proposals? Or am I just in favor of the status quo?

Why is it when running for the Democractic presidential nomination and running for president, you were against a mandate for health insurance...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceOG90OCCRw

Now, http://www.msnbc.msn...th_care/page/2/

"But I've changed my mind on this because what I've — was persuaded of was
that, if we can phase this in so that we know there's affordable insurance out
there — and, in fact, a lot of the uninsured are relatively young people who
could be insured fairly cheaply — that that actually will drive down the cost
for everybody."

Am I not justified to be worried about all of the healthcare proposals? Or am I just supporting the status quo?

Why did your tax increase plan change? First, your proposed tax rates wouldn't exceed the rates of the 1990's under Bill Clinton.

Austan Goolsbee currently a White House economist, from less than a year ago...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z38coMjhkpU

Now, in regards to paying for the healthcare plan....

http://www.huffingto...7_b_244731.html/

"Obama said that taxing millionaires did "meet his principle" that the middle
class wouldn't have to pay for the bill."

So if the surtax passes, tax rates will exceed the rates of the 1990's under Bill Clinton.

Ok, move along, there's nothing more to see.

...but who will protect the clunkers?

Sure, they don't have the freshest coats of paint, GPS, or posh interiors. They may smell like mildew on the inside, have who knows what under the driver's seat, and may even need an extra push to get out of 3rd.

But....

They still work. In fact they get millions of Americans to work everyday. They save American workers alot more than a measly 4,500 most of the time by allowing them to avoid the car payments(don't forget interest) associated with buying a new or used car from a dealer. The clunker is not under warranty, but it does allow people the joys of learning to take care of their possessions, escaping the throw away society that has created an economy based on impulse buying, not educated spending. If taken proper care of, a clunker can far outlast the residual value of a federal program by an average of 20 years.
In fact, Congress could learn alot from owning a clunker. Instead, Congress seems to be threatened by them judging the fact that all turned in clunkers' engines will be locked up with a very nasty chemical instead of simply being scrapped for parts. Could it be our saviors in DC fear the humble little clunker's message of frugality and responsibility?

You better believe it.

A So So Sotomayor.

A boring judicial nominee hearing is a beautiful thing.

There should never be fireworks at Supreme Court nominee hearings anyway. To protect and uphold the Constitution is a pretty straightforward task, don't let Congress or POTUS shred it to pieces. Yet the right was annoyed by not getting Sotomayor to answer questions that would show her liberal viewpoints, and the left is starting to feel a bit edgy on how much she is for "the cause" because Sotomayor stuck to strict legal terminology and theory when answering questions.

I could not ask for more.

I really don't care what her views are if she is humanly able to squelch them in favor of upholding the Constitution. Heck if she never makes news again for the rest of her career as a Justice, America should be thrilled. That means the Court is leaving legislating up to legislators, who believe me do not need any help. I hope one day Sotomayor is a Jay-Walking question that some UCLA grad student makes a fool of themselves on.

Isn't that a measure of greatness for a Justice?

Apocolypse Now!

Which is the bigger joke, that health care can be free or that the government can improve the health of anything it touches? I suggest every loyal citizen take a course in first aid for you may soon find yourself on a central planned population control wait list for those excessive MRI's you have become spoiled on.

You see its not that the compassionate fascist are not sincere about healthcare reform, its just that the goal is not improved health, its reduced populations. An example is our brand new "science czar" (what a scary thought) who is quite convinced there are just too darn many of us running around and we've become quite a burden dear mommy earth. Ideas? Hmm forced abortions, or maybe a drug in the water or food supply to cause you guys to be shooting blanks. I am beginning to see the connections now, to save the environment we must reform healthcare just like to save the economy we must create green jobs and have healthcare reform. It's all so relevant yes?

I personally believe Americans would be much more receptive to such ideas as spermicide tap water if our leaders simply lead by example. For instance if you feel the earth is overpopulated, jump off a building. But you see the experts are just too valuable for us to lose; do as I say, not as I do.