For the conservative amongst my readers...

[olde_fashioned]

For the conservative members of my reader base, or those of you who are concerned about the idea of mandatory national health care, the fate of this country and our God-given right to liberty:

House Vote On ObamaCare Scheduled

The (Unfortunately Necessary) Disclaimer: I get unfriended by people every single time I post something religious, controversial, or political. If you're not familiar with my values and opinions by now, or if what I'm about to post is offensive to you, then that's fine. You're more than welcome to reply, but please be polite and respectful (of me, my God, my beliefs, as well as my other readers), and please don't leave me a melodramatic comment about how disgusting I am, quibbling over my tag usage, or making a dramatic exit as you defriend me in an enraged huff. Remember my profile was there BEFORE you friended me, and this is, after all, my blog. For the time being at least, I can still say what I want on it. ;-P (Because my life is dramatic enough without any online nonsense!)


Now that I've gotten that little bit of disagreeable business out of the way, here are some bits and pieces from the above article. If you read nothing else please at least read these following excerpts:

"The Senate-passed version would allow the ATF to troll your confidential medical records"...

Guess this doesn't fit under "unlawful search and seizure"...Land of the Free, welcome to the Land of the Legal Loopholes! Let's just pry into everyone's personal records and make one big database out of all their information, because that's such a brilliant idea and of course that will keep it safe from all harm! *coughHACKERS?cough*

"The bill your Representative will be voting on still contains virtually all of the bribes that made the Senate version such a disgusting spectacle."

Oh wow, now I can totally rest assured that the economy will be on an upswing after this little gem passes. The government has done such a fantastic job with all our money, being so responsible and all! Let's just give them truckloads more, shall we? Because of course our always honest and ever-trustworthy elected officials know how to spend our hard-earned money much better than we do.


And this is most particularly alarming --

"...the bill [...] would increase the cost of private insurance [...] and require, under penalty of imprisonment, that you buy it.

If that doesn't scare people or at the very least raise a few eyebrows, then they're probably either already living in a nation with decreased freedoms, or may need to think about relocating to one such country, because obviously the hard-won liberty that has made this nation as great as it is aren't being valued by its citizens.


And of course I saved the best for last...

"...the will of the people, who according to the latest polls, overwhelmingly oppose this legislation..."

What ever happened to vox populi, vox dei?? Not that I personally believe that that's true from a religious standpoint, but from a political standpoint I most certainly do. So ask you, what is the point of having ELECTED officials (sans BHO's czars, of course. *sighs and shakes head* Thanks a lot, GWB, for setting such a delightful precedent of sidestepping the American people and trampling on the checks and balances!), if those very same individuals blatantly ignore the wishes of their constituents??? Let's flood them with emails, harass them with calls, and annoy them by expressing that God-given American right of freedom of speech! Click the appropriate link in the article linked above to do just that.

And what, has everyone forgotten how to spell the word RECALL? California did it to Gray Davis in 2003, so why can't we as a nation do it again with those heedless "employees" of We the People? Politicians are like children -- why would they dream of obeying, if we, like so many parents, are all bark and no bite?

Socialism sound like fun, anyone? I don't know about you but I for one don't want to go to jail simply because I committed the heinous crime of neglecting to buy health care for myself!! Jail is supposed to be for bad people -- you know, like murderers, rapists, and child molesters? Oh wait! I forgot! Those are the people we let out early for good behaviour -- it's those dangerous Martha Stewarts of this world that need to be locked up.

It's a funny world we live in.

Comments

[greeneyedmissy.livejournal.com]

Although I might be slightly naive, I don't see how they can possibly police, much less jail those who don't buy health insurance. Not with the horrible overcrowding of jails now. I do, however, see them imposing horrible fees on people (kinda like what they did with people who downloaded music off the net), so horrible that they would have to put liens on their homes, businesses, etc. So in essence, this would be worse than jail, they'd be on the street and the gov't would have their money.

I have private insurance but my husband works for a small company, so if they raise the price of insurance, the company might have to drop it. But really, I don't see BCBS going out of business, they're just too big.

What I'm afraid of is that it'll just pass silently one day, no fanfare. Obama would like that because he figured out that the more publicity it got, the more the American people said no. Just...boom...and the news comes on to say that they passed it. *shudders to think*

[winterlillies.livejournal.com]

Here's the thing-you will be required to give your banking details to the federal government so they can fine you if you don't buy the public health option. No thank you.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

I don't know that they exactly intend to throw every uninsured person in the slammer, so much as use the threat of jail and the "right to gather information" as a means to another end, i.e., taking away guns and/or not allowing gun owners to have insurance.

What I'm afraid of is that it'll just pass silently one day, no fanfare. Obama would like that because he figured out that the more publicity it got, the more the American people said no. Just...boom...and the news comes on to say that they passed it. *shudders to think*

That's exactly what I'm afraid of.

[littleflower518.livejournal.com]

You didn't mention MY favorite part (NOT) .....all those abortions we'll be forced to pay for!!

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

*snort* Aren't we already paying for those?

[princessjune.livejournal.com]

For the first time, I really don't know what to say.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Heh. I know what you mean.

[winterlillies.livejournal.com]

What people to fail to realize that is that if you can't get a doctor's appointment now with health insurance imagine how that is going to go when everyone has access to it? Most US states have their own public health insurance where people can go if they can't afford a regular plan OR have been turned down so it's up the people to go out and find out what other options there are. Having experienced the health care in the UK and in the US-I still would take the US one in heart beat especially if it required a surgery that I could get here right away versus having to wait years for which is what happens in the UK. There's a tons of Canadians who come to the US and pay out of pocket for their procedures because they don't want to wait it out.

In the end-I'm tired of him shoving down our throats this health care that quiet honestly if it passes most people won't have access to until 3 more years so why the rush? The Democracts fail to remember that we came close to have free health care under Nixon, but kept side stepping what he wanted and refused to pass the bill then.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

You're exactly right, and what annoys me more than anything else is that most people don't want it! It isn't like we're in the minority here -- just once again, we're the "silent majority" and the media represents any opponents to national healthcare like mean-spirited barbarian baby-killers.

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

I just experienced Canadian health "care" (more specifically, British Columbia) for the first time today. I could barely keep myself from crying on the way home because I miss all of the wonder health care in Seattle so much. I'm not going back to the doctor that I saw, but that leaves me with about only 8 other options in my city from what I can tell on the website that shows doctors accepting new patients.

I think the best way I could sum things up is that when a person pays crap for their health care, they get crap in return. And that is exactly what I got today. And I didn't have any other option. Except that I am now more inclined to head down to Seattle more often to pay out of pocket for better doctors (I have a good deal with my old neurologist -- she's always going to charge me the cost of a follow up, which is just $40 without insurance).

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Yeah, keep telling people that, would you?? Maybe they'll listen to you more than someone who hasn't experienced it personally, since that's the mentality nowadays.

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

Yeah, haven't experienced both sides . . . yeah. And I'm not going to say that the US doesn't need reform, but that doesn't mean you throw out the baby with the bathwater.

I'm going to try seeing a different doctor at a different office and see if my experience is any different, but my options are very limited -- I'm only able to see doctors who are accepting new patients. In my city from the search I came up with, there are only about ten doctors accepting new patients. Two of those were at the office I went to which was horrible, so that leaves me with 8 more attempts (the whole office was run terribly in addition to my severe dislike of the doctor I saw, I'm not about to try going to the other doc in the same place, and it's all a symptom of a socialised system).

[areth-lovejoy.livejournal.com]

Tell it, sister.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Thanks! ;-)

[pearly-gold.livejournal.com]

I'm conservative in my views, but I'm British and we have had National Heath Service since the end of the second world war. There have never been any problems with it, nothing major and terrible at least. People go to Private if they have the money to do that/have special needs that they want to be dealt with by a slightly higher business...
At the moment the US is owned by the medical manufactuers in this department, thats really the only reason you havent had national healthcare until now (that and the insane fact you all seem to think having something national means its like communism?!)
You have state-owned schools don't you? It's the SAME thing... you children's education is put in place and controlled by the government unless it's private - your children have their details and test scores put down, all of their information. It's no different to what the national health would do. You can go to private care if you want, if you are rich, all it calls for is a tiny change in taxes (and I suppose that only matters to the rich people who can afford private care anyway)...
And if you're christian, don't you think the teachings would lean towards free health care for all, rather than better healthcare for people that have the money?
I just think you're looking at this in a bias way. As I said, I'm far from liberal, but the health service in England is as much part of my history and heritage.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

First off, I'm not entirely certain of the tone of your comment. You sound borderline hostile in some of your remarks. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you may not have intended to come across that way.

However -- as you stated yourself, you are British and as such I hardly feel you're qualified as an expert on American health care or policies. If you'd care to share your sources proving this "fact" that "At the moment the US is owned by the medical manufactuers" [sic]. I also don't take kindly to the insinuation that those who feel a national, government-run health care program is socialist and/or communistic are "insane". Everyone has the right to their opinion without being insulted, so please, keep your remarks civil in future, or they'll remain screened.

As for being Christian, why is "free" health care (and mind, it's not free, but paid for by the American taxpayer) a more "moral" or "Christian" choice than the alternative? That's a generalization that ought to be left to the conscience and specific religious beliefs of individuals.

the health service in England is as much part of my history and heritage.

Just because it's the customary way of life at present in your country doesn't make it right. I wouldn't want to see the flurry of furious comments if I made a statement that slavery or abortion was a part of my nation's heritage therefore I ought to defend it.

you're looking at this in a bias way

Everyone, every single human being has a bias. It's undeniable and irrefutable; only those who are unwilling to admit their bias claim to be unbiased. Am I biased? Absolutely. I am biased in the way that America ought to remain the way it should be -- allowing her people to have the right to choose their own services, whether they be health care or otherwise, without penalties from an overgrown government grown fat and greedy from overly high taxes and corrupt officials telling them what is "best for them" -- and against their will, to boot.

[ceallaighgirl.livejournal.com]

As for Christian duty, it is NOT Christian duty to force other people to pay for everybody's health care. It is Christian duty to personally help people when they need help, such through private charities where people have voluntarily donated their money, time, &c. Not only is that better because it isn't a mandatory tax, but studies have also shown that private charities are more efficient in helping people than government organisations. Studies have ALSO shown that people are more generous with their money when they aren't as highly taxed, so more people are able to be helped more efficiently.

[pearly-gold.livejournal.com]

I don't mean at all to be hostile, I just wanted to leave a little note, I don't even feel angry or offended as I write this, I'm saying it all in a rather debate-fueled fashion in my head, at least.

But basically.. if it were to be paid for by the taxpayer, which won't really affect your taxes in a huge way really, everyone is being quite charitable, as they are giving to their fellow citizens the right to equal amounts of healthcare at any time, in any place in your country. Rather than, as far as I'm aware, having to have insurance (or the money to pay for treatment) to be healed. If a someone were to fall down in the streets of London they would be taken to hospital without question and given the best treatment available, even those who are homeless and do not pay tax. I think should be seen as a charitable part of your taxes, your money goes into taxes that pay for the government to help the banks in financial crisis, so why not to give towards something that helps everyone in the long run.

And I'm sorry about the communist thing, I just get the feeling the US is a bit strange about democracy being the one and only way to run things. I believe every form of government (or way of living/controlling things) can work if it's done properly. In ancient greece all forms of government (facism/tyrancy, communism, oligarchy, monarchy) were seen in an equal way, there was not good or bad. And I think its only the western domination/democracy that makes that form the great view.

Also, about the heritage thing, I feel as if I can defend most of my heritage, even in the sense of what happened in slavery or abortion rights, because of it's historical context. The historical context of the national health service is a purely good one, there is nothing concerning about it in the slightest.

[ancientwhispers.livejournal.com]

My thoughts exactly, Lauren. *applause*

Request permission to repost this post, Ma'am?

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

Permission granted! ;-)

[ladyneferankh.livejournal.com]

Hi there * waves * (yes I am still alive/well despite your not hearing from me for a while :P ), just wanted to jump in and say I'm inclined to pretty much agree with everything you just posted above.

Another thing--even if we lived in a country where "everyone" had access to a doctor/medicine, all that would happen is that the wealthiest people would find a way to contact the top doctors from the US or interntationally, as well as get swifter access to the "best" medicines and cutting edge treatments. Thus the healthcare every American would be provided with would still be "unequal" after a fashion.

A few people have brought up the idea of public schools in comparison--this system functions--but is deeply flawed, wealthy parents often place their children in elite private schools. The dismal state of public school children is thus hardly a pressing concern for the average DC congressman. In the same way, the troubled, tangled mess our healthcare system could well become will hardly trouble future politicians.