Obamacare was passed, challenged, upheld by the Supreme Court, and has begun to be put into effect. I’m sure it will be challenged again at the Supreme Court once certain provisions have begun to be executed, and I hope they rule against it. However, Obamacare being put into effect does not concern me nearly as much as the growing amount of rights that people think they are entitled to. Among life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we have the Bill of Rights and seventeen other amendments to the Constitution, and nowhere is healthcare listed as a guaranteed, government protected right as an American. Why is it then that it has been treated as such in the past few years under the Obama administration?
Healthcare has always been about choice in a free market. You can shop around for competitive prices, much like getting a car. You do not however, shop around for a speedy trial, or to not house troops in your home. These are rights, healthcare is not. It is not the governments job to make sure that you have access to healthcare, just like it is not the job of the government to provide people with cars. Yet, it has gotten into the governments head that it is indeed a right that it is determined to secure for all Americans. For Americans that wish to have the freedom to choose whether they enter the healthcare market or not, they will receive huge fines.
What would happen to the rest of America if other parts of the free market were suddenly deemed rights? What if iPads were suddenly deemed something every American deserves? What if pudding cups were declared an essential component to American life? What if it was decided that cell phones were god given and unalienable? We would descend on the slippery slope to, oh wait…Low income Americans do get cell phones. They get housing, food stamps and welfare checks every week. And in recent years welfare has been dramatically expanded. In 2011, $61,194 was spent on each 16,807,795 households in poverty (on average).
This “right to welfare” has been a sad occurrence in the United States that has been extensively increased in the recent years under the Obama administration. During the recent debt ceiling crisis’, entitlements have been only been lightly feigned at by the Republican’s in Congress, and totally protected by Obama. There is almost no need for people to work anymore with the great care that the Obama administration will bestow upon them. Not working is more appealing than working. Would someone work 12 hours a day, five days a week at minimum wage for a little over $400, when they could collect food stamps, welfare checks and a phone for doing nothing? Americans are smart enough to realize this, and many are taking advantage of those who work, courtesy of our dear leader Obama.
Soon I suspect that free cable subscriptions will be next entitlement given to those who the government deems worthy. The only question is whether it will be DirecTV of Comcast, depending on who gives more to Hillary or Biden in 2016.
February 4th, 2013 at 2:53 pm
You’re talking about the gravitation towards communism (“socialism”) that liberals embraced after the communist party folded most of their members into the Democrat party some decades ago. It’s a philosophy of cradle-to-grave “right to comfort” whether or not it is earned by hard work or lazy couch potatoes.
February 4th, 2013 at 4:22 pm
Patrick, a guy named Paul Brian, an Emeritus Professor of English at Washington State University gave his take on “Democrat Party” vrs the proper name “Democratic Party”.
“Certain Republican members of Congress have played the childish game in recent years of referring to the opposition as the “Democrat Party,” hoping to imply that Democrats are not truly democratic. They succeed only in making themselves sound ignorant, and so will you if you imitate them. The name is “Democratic Party.” After all, we don’t say “Republic Party.”
Paul Brians wrote that several years ago, way before today’s GOP took blatant dishonesty to a new level and just kept shoveling it until someone believes it. This was even before George W. Bush would often use it. But with GWB’s gross assault on the English language, I suppose people just over looked it.
February 4th, 2013 at 5:26 pm
Democrat democrap , who cares.
If anything the partys process has been anything but democratic in light of recent autocratic acts
February 4th, 2013 at 6:17 pm
Actually Micky you too succeed only in making yourself sound ignorant.
February 4th, 2013 at 6:43 pm
yeah it’s pretty embarrassing that anyone cares about democratic and democrat since nobody knows what our Marxist friend is talking about these days. Language changes, words evolve, which is a beauty of our English language. Democrat and Democratic are interchangeable now to people who have a life.
February 4th, 2013 at 7:02 pm
Corporations (like Chevrolet) are happy when the public creates positive slang terms for them, like Chevy. Accessibility is a good thing.
February 4th, 2013 at 8:04 pm
“Actually Micky you too succeed only in making yourself sound ignorant.”
Thats awfully rich coming from a guy who just yesterday had to be educated during his rare but brazen use of the word “sht” that “doodoo” is sht and “dodo” is not.
Its also very pedantic of you to concern yourself with what we call those who occupy the democratic party.
“The Democratics are coming, the Democratics are coming” ! is just not rolling off the tongue that well.
Your Emeritus Professor of English at Washington State University sounds like he talks dirty to himself.
As far as Bush assaulting the English language goes I challenge you to see if he ever read “Colonel” or “Corps” off the teleprompter. exactly as it was spelled.
Its easy to be to be The Great Orator when you make every public announcement with numerous teleprompters filled by speech writers.
Its quite different when hes in an interview stuttering and stammering like a nervous virgin.
Many people have recently been afflicted with an unfortunate tendency to equate criticism of democratic outcomes instituted by democrats with criticism of democracy itself.
It should be painfully obvious to us all that just because a party came into power democratically does not immunise it from criticism, and neither can that fact be used to shut off debate about whether the government is impinging on the rights of its citizens.
The debate is over healthcare as a right, which it is not.
Your obfuscation to pedantic bullsht is just another example of how leftists use character attacks, albeit their vocabulary, as a means to demean an opponent unworthy of the debate in an effort to shut it off.
February 4th, 2013 at 8:58 pm
It’s been coming for a long time. States expanding Medicaid so that ghetto kids can get free dental care. Social Security “crazy checks” are an entitlement for many of America’s permanently entitled minority. Even the Christmas charities see it. I work for one every year. Angel tree and other such programs get wish lists that don’t include football or baseball glove any more. Instead, LaDante wants an X-box 360 and Quineshi’a wants an iPod. Ridiculous.
February 5th, 2013 at 5:57 am
Patrick, don’t rely solely on Urban Dictionary as a literary source. Remember, things which evolve in your own little corner in your own little chair where you can be whatever you want to be are seldom consistent with what evolves in the real world. Obviously, it’s a colossal challenge for you to differentiate the two.
February 5th, 2013 at 7:21 am
Ronald,
I consider it partially political but also a matter of grammar. One would not say, “Obama is a Democratic.” But it is also true that The Democrats are anything but Democratic. People talk about the Republicans needing a ‘Big Tent.’ The Democrats operate not a single tent but subdivide the nation into numerous core groups, pandering to each. The problem, of course, is that in doing so, you make unjust laws that only benefit a few. Not exactly a ‘Democratic’ way of operating.
February 5th, 2013 at 11:39 am
Well Ronald, you’re a Marxist and not a democrat so wtf are you btching about ?
Theres many dictionaries that list the word “democrat”.
If someone calls it the “democrat party”, I know what they mean. “A party of democrats”
If Obama calls the Colonel the Colon with and el at the end I have no idea what the fck hes saying.
Or The Marine “Corpse” for that matter.
Stick that in your Funk and Wagnalls.
February 5th, 2013 at 1:06 pm
Ronald, A+ for using the word “evolve” twice in one sentence! Quota for the year achieved.
February 5th, 2013 at 1:12 pm
You cant grade him.
It snot fair to other Marxists
February 5th, 2013 at 1:21 pm
Andy, like Patrick, you seem to be demanding that your personal opinion is undisputed fact. That can only be true in that confined space I mentioned.
February 5th, 2013 at 1:56 pm
“Andy, like Patrick, you seem to be demanding that your personal opinion is undisputed fact.”
Anyone notice the change lately ?
Instead of these lenghty post that try to make arguments with cherry picked exceptions to the rules Ronald is resorting more and more comments that serve only to expose his inability to think in more than one dimension.
All hope is not lost. He actually took a shot at humor the other day.
That was funny in itself.
Kinda like Obama skeet shooting or laughing about 3 trillion dollars worth of shovel ready jobs that werent shovel ready
February 5th, 2013 at 3:48 pm
Logan, you seem to base your argument on a rather Libertarian tone. You’re correct that health care isn’t listed as a guaranteed, government protected right anywhere in the Constitution. Nor is it listed that ERs must treat people at the tax payers’ expense. I’ve heard Alaska has laws (which I assume were enacted prior to cell phones) with severe penalties for failure to render aid to stranded motorists (something due to temperatures reaching -75 degrees). Isn’t that an infringement on one’s rights and shouldn’t it be left to the free markets to respond to? It’s not in the Constitution.
You invoke the Constitutionality of the laws so pudding cups and IPods make it a specious argument. Any tax dollars in any respect to anyone, regardless of their situation, would be strictly prohibited.
I find it interesting that so many of today’s so called conservatives try to have it both ways.
February 5th, 2013 at 5:30 pm
Ronald, you are confusing a state constitution with the federal one although I am certainly glad that you are an expert in Alaskan law. I don’t see anything in the federal constitution that would restrict a state’s ability to regulate cellular phones, or for that matter enact health care legislation as was done in MA. Are you tired today?
February 5th, 2013 at 7:02 pm
” Any tax dollars in any respect to anyone, regardless of their situation, would be strictly prohibited.”
Thats stoopid, no one said that.
Must you make arguments based on udder bullsht ?
Actually, penalties for failing to render aid are constitutional in the right circumstances in many states.
February 5th, 2013 at 8:54 pm
Patrick, read my post again and point to where I said anything pertaining to a state’s ability or inability to regulate cell phones. Seriously, Micky’s incoherent gibberish has become more rational than yours lately.
February 5th, 2013 at 9:19 pm
Something, something, Marxist, something, something, something.
February 5th, 2013 at 10:11 pm
Well played, Snow.
February 5th, 2013 at 11:43 pm
Obama was attacked by Republicans because he cut $716 billion of socialism from the U.S. budget. Romney promised to restore the $716 billion in socialism. And Republicans cheered, not hooted, whenever they heard him say this.
So you Republicans are Socialists. Just learn to accept yourselves as you are and life will seem brighter.
February 6th, 2013 at 2:26 am
Ronald, read your own “post” again and explain in new and different words. (by the way you made a “comment” not a “post”). You discussed Alaskan law and attempted to relate it to the US Constitution. Explain again your point and we will all breathlessly hang on your clarification. Your point again is ____?
February 6th, 2013 at 3:36 am
Hey! How about a trade? Us liberals will agree second amendment allows every yahoo a gun if you agree that the constitution requires the US gov to care for the health, safety, and welfare of its people?
Psych! A conservative supreme court ruled that health care was constitutional and the “right to bear arms” isn’t. So HA.!
February 6th, 2013 at 8:21 am
Sorry I’ve been MIA (battling a sinus infection), and it might be the penisilun, but when has Obama cut any money, and whe did the SC rule against the 2nd amendment?