Big Brother Obama

Jump to Last Post 51-100 of 145 discussions (797 posts)
  1. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    I know people that are still paying off a debt from ER visits years ago.  People without jobs or part-time jobs cannot simply snap their fingers and pay for comprehensive health care.

    1. nicomp profile image60
      nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      So what? They also have car payments for years. They have apartment payments for years. Isn't their health more important?

      This attitude of entitlement is killing us.

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Exaggeration is king I see.  Paying a large medical bill for breaking your arm is not like paying for a car.  People need adequate health care to meet their needs.  If your arm is broken and not set properly your mobility will be limited, but if your car breaks down you can always walk or take the bus.

        1. nicomp profile image60
          nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Exaggeration is the unsubstantiated belief that we can confiscate a little more money from "the rich" and magically pay for universal free health care. Tragically many people are willing to try it because they don't think it will cost them.

          Exaggeration is the urban myth that a government that can't get water bottles to hurricane victims or properly build levies can run 17% of the economy.

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Interestingly Katrina was mismanaged under Bush, but I know I am not supposed to talk about him. FEMA was in trouble financially back in 2003, and those of us who went through the Southern California fires already knew this.

            Nationalized health care works just fine in many countries that do not have this obsession with people "stealing" their money.  We pay taxes now, so it is not as if you keep every penny anyway.  The US still ranks 37th in the world when it comes to health care, so there is something we are not doing right.  We can learn lessons from countries with higher rankings, and see what they have done differently.

            1. nicomp profile image60
              nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              Wrong wrong wrong. It's bankrupting many countries and it's led to end-of-life rationing. If you want that, fine. I don't.



              We have the best health care in the world, the delivery system needs a tweak. Please provide the reference for your statistic, 'cause I'll be happy to interpret it for you.

              If our system is so horrible, why does over 80 per cent of the population like their health care?

              http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/19/ … index.html

              1. SweetiePie profile image82
                SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                I am not wrong, and I definitely know what I am talking about.  The US is ranked 37th in the world, and that is the fact.  People on Hubpages living in the UK, Canada, and Australia seem much happier with their health care than many Americans I have spoken to.

                http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

                The US and other countries are also experiencing financial crisis at the moment, so in and of itself health care is not bankrupting nations overseas.

                1. nicomp profile image60
                  nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  My apologies, but I can't make heads or tails from your rankings. Here's the spreadsheet behind the rankings:
                  http://www.photius.com/rankings/world_h … stems.html

                  I'd appreciate your interpretation.

                  1. SweetiePie profile image82
                    SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    This webpage is showing how health care is ranked by quality in the world.  It is pretty simple to figure out really.

                2. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this
                  1. nicomp profile image60
                    nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    How do you rank a Chinese hospital?

        2. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Not everyone. People 'need' lots of things. If you believe that the government should take from others to provide a teat for the rest perhaps a different country would be more to your liking.

  2. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    The point is that a difference right now between having good, flexible, complete medical care and not is $$. Does it have to be that way?

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes it does.

  3. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years ago

    It is incredibly unrealistic to think that families who can barely keep themselves fed and sheltered can possibly set aside funds for medical emergencies.  I'm far from being a "big government solutions" guy, but this is definitely a broken system.  Government has played a part in creating this mess and will certainly have a role in cleaning it up.

    1. ledefensetech profile image67
      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      So what do we need to do to increase the supply of medical care?  More supply = lower prices.  Of course that means that doctors will be paid less because there will be more of them, but what is more important, keeping doctor's wages high or lowering the cost of medical care?  Why let drug companies keep a monopoly on newly created drugs.  If people find they help for a certain disease, they'll ask their doctors about it and be put on it.  The only thing a monopoly does is make more money for the drug companies than would otherwise be the case.  Increasing the number of doctors and eliminating drug company privileges would go a long way to making healthcare more affordable in this country.  Yet nobody is suggesting it.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Do you mean we should eliminate or reduce the timeline for drug patent rights?

        1. ledefensetech profile image67
          ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Ideally, we'd eliminate those and eliminate quotas on the numbers of doctors a state licenses per year here in the States.  Then the supply of healthcare would increase to meet the demand.  That is, after all, what we're arguing about isn't it?  Getting enough of a supply of healthcare to meet the demand?

          @Colebabie.  When you talk about anything tax funded, you're talking about taking from one group of people: i.e. the rich and giving to another, i.e. the poor.  The problem with that is our economic health is tied to the wealthy being able to invest their money in new enterprises.  Less money for that means less new businesses and less jobs.  Everyone suffers in that scenario. 

          Plus I've worked with people in government and let me tell you they're not always the brightest crayon in the box.  Anytime you let politics into the equation, politics drives the actions, not common sense.  I'd rather have a capitalist who has to worry about customer satisfaction and controlling costs at the helm rather than some unaccountable bureaucrat running things.  At least if the capitalist screws up, he'll soon find himself out of a job.  The bureaucrat will still be in that job or shuffled off to push papers around.  Hardly a wise use of scarce resources.

  4. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years ago

    If you eliminate drug patents, why would a drug company do the R&D to develop new drugs?  Where is the financial incentive?

    1. ledefensetech profile image67
      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Why does any company do R&D?  Profit.  That's how our standard of living increases and how we afford more things.  We'd see fewer drug companies that's for sure, but those that remained would be the ones who were best able to develop new treatments at the lowest cost.  The incentive would be, as usual, profit.  The difference would be that companies could no longer rest on their laurels, once they made one breakthrough, they'd have to work on another.  Do you think the demand for drugs is going to disappear, just because the drug companies no longer have a monopoly?

      Right now we have a lot of drug companies we don't really need.  Monopolies are just another form of welfare and everyone pays when you have a situation like that.  Not to mention you open government up to corruption and soon enough government starts working for drug companies rather than the people that put them in office.

      1. nicomp profile image60
        nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        We have precisely the number of drug companies we really need. The free market sets the number. If they can turn a profit, they get to stay in business.

      2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        The necessary profit to recoup the R&D dollars would not exist without the patents, that's why they exist.  Analysing and copying drugs is a piece of cake.  Without a patent there is zero incentive to be first in the market with any new drug.  You make just as much with your generic as the company that develops it at great expense.

        1. ledefensetech profile image67
          ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yes it would.  When you subsidize a thing, you allow costs to grow all out of proportion.  After all what incentive do you have to control costs if you are assured a certain profit.  This lack of cost awareness trickles down the production chain.  The companies that make the instruments the drug companies need to do testing, for example, are assured a certain profit so what incentive do they have to control costs.  The lack of cost control has a greater impact than just in drug companies or those who support the drug companies.  Over time, the entire US economy becomes more and more expensive and less and less competitive.  That, in a nutshell, is why we've lost our manufacturing base over the last few decades.

          What would happen is that companies would be forced to look at low costs ways to develop new drugs.  Those companies that are successful in doing that would survive and prosper.  Those that did not would go bankrupt.  Why would you want to support a company that wastes time, money and talent on things that are too expensive or that people don't want?

  5. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Americans are not as satisfied with health care as some believe:

    http://www.webmd.com/healthy-aging/news … ils-others

  6. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Why even the need to ask this question?  I am sorry TK I am sure she is not offended, but I am not sure what you are trying to imply.

  7. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    These are top ranked hospitals, not overall quality of health care in each country.  The World Health Organization has noted that overall the US ranks 37th in the world, which means we have some really good hospitals, and some that are severely understaffed and unresourced.

    1. ledefensetech profile image67
      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Could that be due to the artificial shortage of doctors in this country?

      1. Colebabie profile image60
        Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        What is "artificial" about it? There is a shortage. Now the reasons behind the shortage may vary. But there is in fact a shortage.

        1. ledefensetech profile image67
          ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          It's artificial because medical schools limit the number of slots they allocate to medical students each year.  More doctors would be minted every year if that practice would end.

          1. Colebabie profile image60
            Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Would you prefer an overcrowded medical school with less patient contact and professor interaction?
            My school fits 30 students. I've sat in the classes. As much as I wish it was easier for some of my friends to get in. I understand why it is that way. I've also sat in at UF. And they're ranked way up there. So you can't have both lots of students and amazing education. They just don't have the professors for it.

            1. ledefensetech profile image67
              ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              If conditions ever got that bad, which they wouldn't unless of some external factor, we'd see more medical schools open up and take on the excess students.  Supply will always rise to meet demand.  Did you know we haven't had a new medical school open up to train doctors in over a century?

              1. Colebabie profile image60
                Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Huh?? Where do you live that there is no new medical school?

                1. ledefensetech profile image67
                  ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  You were talking about medical schools not being able to absorb a large influx of students.  If that ever happened, you'd see new medical schools open up to take the extra number of students.  In this case the supply of medical schools would increase to meet the demand of medical students. 

                  You think the shortage of doctors is not artificial.  Don't you think it strange that we haven't seen a new medical school open in this country for over a century?  One of the reasons you haven't seen that is because the medical schools limit their supply of slots so that the number of doctors in this country is limited.  Since they know for sure how many people they'll allow to become doctors each year, there is no need for new medical schools.  It's just another piece of evidence that the supply of doctors is artificially restricted.  Because doctors are scarce, they can charge more than would otherwise be the case.

                  1. Colebabie profile image60
                    Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    What makes you think there aren't new medical schools?

    2. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this
      1. Colebabie profile image60
        Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, our doctor's are amazing. But the overall access to them is not. UF is 42. Nice smile

  8. maven101 profile image72
    maven101posted 14 years ago

    Doctors are people too...I have found many are relocating to smaller communities and away from big cities...I live in northern Arizona, small towns with small populations ( 12,000 and less )...We have probably the finest resident medical staff for everything from heart surgery to spinal repair as anywhere in the country...They move here because we have less crime, provide a superior educational system, and have a stable population level...

    Most are GP's interested in improving the health and well being of their patients...more personal contact and connectivity...more involved in the community like Walk for Life, and free seminars on diet and life style opportunities... I have a dentist that allows patients to pay what they can, when they can...The system may be broke, but it works just fine in Small Town USA...I wonder why that is...Larry

    1. ledefensetech profile image67
      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The economics of small towns make it essential that doctors treat their patients like customers, rather than assembly line fashion like you see in larger populations.

  9. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    More than half of all medical patents in the world each year are filed in the US.

  10. fortunerep profile image68
    fortunerepposted 14 years ago

    In my little nutshell, Obama is someone you will only learn of when it is too late. He is trying and will succeed to run the whole globe.  All you have to do is watch and listen and look yourself.  Pay attention to whatis going on.  It is rumored that he is trying to de-populate the society because economically we in the us are over populated.  He wants to keep everyone else out.  He wants it to be his nation and why Americans have stood back and wacth thinking he is going to change to the world is crazier than I. Just look at my Swine Flu reports, look at the map, if you are good at math and know statisics and econmonics you will see that people are dying every day from a possible man made virus.  Yet, DC has very  very little cases.  His universal Healthcare plan is designed for the govenerment to make money, not to provide care to all.  If we make it through 4 years without major crisis over and over it will only be becuase he failed.  Don't be fooled, and this is just not an opinion, do the research, do the math.  and for God's sake don't drink the Kool-aid.  and DO NOT take a vaccinne for the flu.  It was given to soldiers and although the number is hazy, their experiment caused deaths of our american soldiers fighting for our country.  They say it is going to get worse, ofcouse it is, the vaccine is a placebo or the flu itself and they can't find the source becuase it was man made.

    1. ledefensetech profile image67
      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Swine flu kills the elderly, children and people who have underlying health conditions, just like the regular flu.  Now if it mutates and begins causing a cytokine storm in its victims, you'll start to see healthy people die. There's no way this can be a man made virus, we're at the "ding go the fries" stage in genetic manipulation.

      1. fortunerep profile image68
        fortunerepposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        well then ignore me, I hve contacts in DC, not just peope who live there but well that all i can say about that, don't pay attention you will see for yourself, then you will  believe me.  Sorry posted this under the wrong subject.  I also work at a med school, and thier numbers are way way down.

    2. SweetiePie profile image82
      SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Every group has their own propaganda and kool-aid so to speak.  With all respect you are welcome not to like Obama, but his plans to depopulate the world is one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories out there.  There are a lot of these actually ranging from the birth certificate to depopulation.  I would not fall for that propaganda.

      1. fortunerep profile image68
        fortunerepposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        you already have

        1. SweetiePie profile image82
          SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          It is one thing to say you do not like Obama for his policies, but these conspiracy theories are just plain wrong.  As far as I am concerned you have fallen for you own propaganda too smile. However, in a few years people can laugh about the birth certificate and depopulation theories, and I know they will.

  11. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    So our doctors, hospitals, and medical innovation is the best in the world. Maybe we need to make improvements in access without destroying all those positives.

    1. Colebabie profile image60
      Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed.

  12. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    <---Raises hand

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Um, yes, you in the back

      1. Colebabie profile image60
        Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Mr. tksensei... is it... umm... The Republic of China?

        (but they do see themselves as a completely independent nation do they not?)

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Well done! The independent country thing is a bit of a complicated subject though.

          1. Colebabie profile image60
            Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Yes it is. But it is my understanding that the majority want to be seen as an independent nation and even want the official name changed.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              Er, even that is complicated. Most people understand the relationship with the PRC is delicate and crucial on several levels. And except for people who trace their ancestry to the indigenous people of the island everyone identifies themselves as 'Chinese' as an ethnic, racial, cultural, and historical matter.

              1. Colebabie profile image60
                Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Really? Didn't know that. I thought they were pretty independent and didn't associate with anything "china" very much. But I understand.

              2. Milla Mahno profile image60
                Milla Mahnoposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Yeah, I know one "Taiwanese" girl, and this is pretty much what she says. They want to be together, just don't want to be under commies. smile

  13. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    And who would?

    1. Misha profile image64
      Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Americans do sad

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Not yet

        1. Misha profile image64
          Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Umm, aren't we hanging out on the same forum? Look around smile

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Yup, filled with Commies.  Good thing most of us are packin' heat so we can deal with the red menace. yikes

  14. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    Have you spotted some Commies 'round these parts?

    1. Misha profile image64
      Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I did not say the forum is full of commies, while there are a few probably, like Coldwarbaby. But everybody who supports current administration supports commies. smile

  15. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Well I am certainly not a Communist, although I am sure some of you think that lol.  The UK, Canada, France, and many other countries have socialized health care, so do you really believe these countries are communistic?  Social support systems do not make a country Communist smile.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      http://mudsharkstudios.org/images/riswold3_off.png


      Good morning Sweetie Pie.
      Don't you know that Communists are very sneaky?  They could be hiding anywhere, even in your breakfast!!

  16. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    The idea of nationalized health care has been around since Truman, so it is hardly full on raging Communism.  Well I think anyone looking for Communists in America should be looking for UFO's in the sky.  We have a group that goes to Joshua Tree and actually has stake outs for those.  A country that takes care of their people is humanistic, not Communistic.  Obama is not a Communist, just to clear that up.  He is a Democrat lol.

    Obama is actually an admirable person that has overcome a lot in his life and achieved the American dream.  He is not the boogy man people make him out to be.  Some just want a villain.  For some Bush was the villain and for others Obama is.  Neither of them are villains, you either like their policies or you do not.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      They camp out in Joshua Tree looking for commies? yikes

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Commies grow on trees?

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          No, they hide in them.  Joshua trees grow in thick groves and can reach heights of over 1,000 feet making them great places to hide.  By coincidence, they were named after Joshua Socialyski, a famous Communist agitator from the 1920's.

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            With the UFOs?

  17. Tom Cornett profile image82
    Tom Cornettposted 14 years ago

    Boy George is a commie..."commie, commie, commie chameleon"

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      smile

  18. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Actually Boy George sang that song about the drummer he was having an affair with.  His lover hid his true feelings in front of others, and that is what the song is about.  Boy George said so himself.

    1. Tom Cornett profile image82
      Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      There goes my conspiracy theory!  smile

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        The drummer says Boy George is making it up, but the band mates said they had really big fights all the time.  So we could either believe Boy George or the drummer.  I guess you can decide.

        1. Tom Cornett profile image82
          Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I guess he won't be Obama's Fashion Czar then?

  19. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Okay some people back in the 70's used to go out to Joshua Tree and look for UFO's.  Some still do it today, but it was really popular back in the day lol.  Joshua Tree National Monument is very beautiful by the way, if you have never been.

    The paranoia over Communists is similar to looking for UFO's in the sky.  Some people are Communist, but they usually belong to the Communist party.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Except that we know that Communists actually exist.

      1. jiberish profile image78
        jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Not only do Communist exist, they are living in the White House.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          No!!!!!!!!!!!!1They're hiding in the thick forests of 1,000 ft Joshua trees.  Try to keep up.

          1. jiberish profile image78
            jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry. The UFO that landed in my back yard, blinded me for a minute.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              Blinded you with science?

        2. SweetiePie profile image82
          SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          That is a far fetched assertion.  I guess you did not even read my post about how the hard core liberals and real Communists consider Obama to be way too moderate.  People that have real Communistic or Socialistic aspirations in the US vote for the own candidates of their parties.  Yes there are actually small US parties that nominate their own candidates for president, but you usually do not hear about them because we are primarily a two party system in this country. 

          Honestly accusing anyone of being a Communist is what McCarthyism was about, and I think people should have more respect for their fellow Americans.  You do not have to like everyone, but at least do some research and find out who the real Communists are in the US.  I do not support Communism personally, but under our Constitution the Communist party is allowed to function and operate like any other party.  Many loath the Communist party, but they will never be large enough or solid enough to pose a real threat for the White House.  The US remains primarily a two party system with Democrats and Republicans vying over the White House, and with the other parties actually casting their votes on candidates that will probably never be voted into office.  In 1992 Ross Perot was the last Independent candidate that had a change at the presidential race, but his withdrawal has helped to confirm that the majority of voting Americans are more comfortable with the two party system.

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            And he was mostly right.

            1. SweetiePie profile image82
              SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              If you think McCarthy was right then you really need to read up on his term in office.  He destroyed the careers of many people that posed no real threat to the US government.  Ironically McCarthyism started the trend of Americans being much more critical of their politicians.

              1. tksensei profile image59
                tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Records from the Soviet Union only recently released point to most of the most high-profile individuals he accused of being Communists having actually been just what he suspected.

                1. SweetiePie profile image82
                  SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  The majority either participated in the arts that were not sanctioned by his narrow world view or participated in political parties that went against his paranoid ideology.  By the way he even accused Lucille Ball of being a red because her dad had been a member of a socialistic party in 1912, which was actually before the Russian revolution.  Neither of them were Communists. This is an example of how far fetched her antics really were.  McCarthyism is nothing to be proud of.

                  1. tksensei profile image59
                    tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    Or because in 1936 she registered to vote as a member of the Communist Party.



                    Everyone remembers what some slacker former hippy History teacher told them ages ago, and few bother to study history.

  20. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Yes Communists do exist, but you would be surprised how moderate and bland actual liberals consider Obama.  The real left wing liberals are mad that Obama has not been more aggressive on nationalized health care, banning assault weapons, or legalizing marijuana.  Obama has actually toned down much of his agenda and gone a much more moderate path.  Compromise is an art in Washington, but he is simply not the raging Communist some people believe.  Besides most people have grown tired of hard core Communism, and membership in the actually Communist party is not all that high.

    Here is an article by a man that does not exactly support universal health care, but he points out some of the hypocrisy on the side of a few Republicans going up against it.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … id=topnews

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      That's a great point.  Obama has certainly not taken a far left stance on any significant issue.

  21. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    I actually have done some research and have listened to what both sides are saying about Obama.  Hard cord liberals like him better than Bush, but they are not exactly supporting him either.  Bush had a lot of unfounded hatred too, but to me if I do not like a politician it is because of their policies, and that is all it should be.  Back during the Clinton administration people on our campus talked about how there was a list of people around him that mysteriously died.  That was the controversy of that day, and the birth certificate and depopulation theories are the rumors people love to spread today.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Plus Communism.

  22. Misha profile image64
    Mishaposted 14 years ago

    The cornerstone of communism is state ownership of means of production, and with bailouts and such Obama did a good job in seizing the opportunity to acquire a big chunk of countrie's means of production. State owned healthcare is the next opportunity. smile

    1. SweetiePie profile image82
      SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The bailouts started with Bush and the banks.  European countries have also had similar bailouts, and jobs would have been lost without these.  Obama simply continued what Bush was doing, so if you think he is a Communist by that narrow definition, so is Bush.  By the way the UK is not a Communist country and they have nationalized health care.  Countries cannot fit in our neat little boxes just because we want them too.

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        And jobs were lost with them.

        1. SweetiePie profile image82
          SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Quite a few jobs were saved as well.

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            LOL! That is the funniest 'math' of this administration so far! Jobs "saved"! Some fancy accounting there.

            1. SweetiePie profile image82
              SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              Your math is not so accurate either.  All you said is jobs were lost as well.  Please make a detailed chart for us along with a hub  on this subject since you love statistics so.

              1. tksensei profile image59
                tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                When did I say I loved statistics? Please try to be more accurate in your comments.

                Now then, until just today unemployment has only gone UP since all these 'stimuli' were passed.

                1. SweetiePie profile image82
                  SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Our city was so far in debt they were going to shut down the library several days a week, cut the police force, and the senior center.  Stimulus money and the city council standing up for the community has helped to keep a few things functioning.

                  1. tksensei profile image59
                    tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    Thanks for the heart warming anecdote, but that completely ignores what I just said.

                  2. nicomp profile image60
                    nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    You are missing two salient points:

                    1. Your stimulus money was confiscated from another city, so their police force, library and senior center suffered. There's no way around that. The federal government is not a profit center; all they can do is redistribute wealth. If you think your city is more important than other cities, then keep doing what you're doing.

                    I am sorry if your city is hurting, however I don't think you should be pleased that some other city suffers so you don't have to.


                    2. The federal government is in no way shape or form mandated to fund your library, police force, and senior center. It's not what they are chartered to do. Even if they are swimming in cash, they are not in the business of maintaining city services. Those facilities are the responsibility of your city and in some cases your state.

      2. Misha profile image64
        Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Oh, absolutely, Bush was doing the same job of preparing the country to state ownership. And McCain would have continued it no less then Obama. However, in this case I would have been talking about fascism, not communism.

        And yes, European countries run fast towards communism IMO.

        On a side note, I do notice with pleasure that you became much more fun to converse with, congratulations on your good job of changing yourself. smile

    2. IntimatEvolution profile image68
      IntimatEvolutionposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, but like you said, "State"; not Federal.  There is a difference here in America.  A big difference.  But I do understand what you are saying.  But this healthcare is beyond my knowledge and capabilities of understanding.  Seriously though, are ANY of us TRULY qualified to fix the system?  Obama was voted in by a landslide, with his healthcare plans voiced openly to the public.  So the one thing I can say about this President, is that I appreciate him looking into how successful and conservative clinics and hospital are being run.  I like the fact that Obama is having open forums, gathering Doctors around him- to voice their opinions and wise direction on the matter; instead of just throwing this to the greedy dragon's den we call congress.  This I do appreciate.

      1. Misha profile image64
        Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        I don't think there is a big difference. Formally USSR was a federation, too. smile

        1. IntimatEvolution profile image68
          IntimatEvolutionposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          A Federation of forced countries, conquered under a dictatorship.  Is that right?

          If you need reference points to the difference between the two, just look into the history books of FEMA, Federal Assistance, Federal Aid, Federal Taxes, Federal Grants for state run programs, etc........  just to name a few.  There is a BIG difference.  Though, I'm sure to non-American citizens it appears differently.  Are you a US citizen?  I think I read in one of your posts that your wife is maybe?  But you are not?  Is that correct?  Anyhow- comparing us to the USSR, is a little far fetch.  Or, that is my opinion. 

          Fellow American Hubbers, are we just like that of the Eastern block or I mean Federation?

          1. Misha profile image64
            Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I will leave American history to LDT or TMG, if they would chime in. Just would remind you about civil war, wasn't it sort of north conquering south? smile

            As for the USSR, you seem to have a few misconceptions about it. Eastern block was way bigger then USSR, and USSR territory was mostly conquered during monarchy period, starting hundreds of years before communists. In fact it was even smaller, some territories as Poland or Finland were lost during revolution. smile

            And no, I am not American citizen, neither my wife is. But we've been living here for about 10 years already.

            1. IntimatEvolution profile image68
              IntimatEvolutionposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              North CONQUERING the South?  My, my yeah....  leaving your American history to whomever might be a good idea.  Like I'll leave the Russian history to yourself.  You know what I mean?  Thanks for the lesson, I really had no idea.  (Note, the question marks.)  I graduated in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell.  Those faces, sure looked happy to see the free world.smile

  23. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Joshua Trees are smaller than that tree, and very poky.  I need to find a picture.  They are called Joshua Trees because the Mormon migrants to California thought they looked like Joshua raising his hand to the heavens.

  24. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Obama may not be perfect, but he actually seems more open to what people have to say.  In interviews Bush said he always knew best.  At least the latter is trying to work with the people, and even if you do not like him you can respect him for that.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      How so? This administration has been as partisan, stubborn, and arrogant as any other (or all the others if you like).

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Obama and Clinton were more bipartisan than Bush Jr. ever was.  Also, the bipartisan thing goes both ways, so the member of Congress can often slow down the process.

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Nope.

        2. IntimatEvolution profile image68
          IntimatEvolutionposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Agreed!  It goes back to the whole timeline thing, and unrealistic expectations.  I'm curious as to why so many American citizens, and citizens of the world don't recognize that Congress truly has the power to get things done.  And without them working, as they should- NOTHING can get passed.

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            They are more interested in passing Constitutional amendments to give themselves raises.  Congress is a big time waster, and it always will be.

  25. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Well you do know wiretapping began back in the eighties, it just was more widespread under the Patriot Act.  Bush also trampled on the Constitution, and many other presidents.  Obama is not as bad as people make him out to be, and yes I am saying it out loud.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Why is it note worthy that you are saying it out loud?

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Because I can phrase things anyway I like.  You can be a little snippy at times.  Go drink some coffee or something smile.

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Um, ok. Did anyone tell you that you couldn't? (why do I get the feeling you are soon going to defend your 'dignity' and tell us how smart you are again?)

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You do know that you are being a little too incessant, right?  If you do not like my responses to you, just ignore me.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              No thank you.

  26. IntimatEvolution profile image68
    IntimatEvolutionposted 14 years ago

    Oh and one more thing, WE ALL have to work around Congress's schedule.  It's not like they are working for us 365 days a year anymore.  I think they worked something like 180 days last year, and the year before.  And of course they took all major holidays, and Federal holidays off as well.  So that number is actually lower than that.  I'd like to see us working harder to keep our Congressmen on a better timeline.  So who ever is in office, could get things done in a timely manner.  I wish I made over $200,000 a year, and only worked about five months out of the year. 

    And oh, not pay taxes like everyone else has too....  Congress is out of control.

  27. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Okay thanks I think lol smile.

    1. Misha profile image64
      Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      LOL Yes, it was a compliment smile

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        I know, I was being silly smile.

        1. Misha profile image64
          Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          LOL smile

  28. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago
  29. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    And now reports of intimidation to keep protesters out of these 'town hall meetings' so busloads of union workers (SEIU) and plants could fill the seats so Senators and Reps won't have to hear from citizens who don't support this unhealth plan being pushed. A program to "drown out opposition" (from the SEIU website).

    Just saw a video of some guy getting a beating by a bunch of thick-necked fellas wearing SEIU t-shirts outside the front door of a 'townhall' meeting site in Missouri while a bunch more a ushered into the hall via a side door.

    Wow, and I thought the Republicans blew it when they had majorities...

    1. jiberish profile image78
      jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      But will the Messiah listen?

  30. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 14 years ago

    OMG.  Yeah, it figures.

    I'm watching the 'protesters' on TV just screaming raw obliterate phrases at these town hall meetings....no "feedom of speech," just emoting and screaming.  The wingnuts have been stirred up with a lot of hate mongering propaganda and are showing their true colors with the blessings and incitement of Limbaugh and Glen Beck.

    I have to say it--we need to say what it is in an open democracy.  They are out there, a bit crazy--I do fear for the country.  The 'birther' thing, the 'government is going to control you through your computer via this bill' thing, the obfuscated information on the health care reform, urging violence--it is all polarizing and a bit insane. 

    A few things tonight have convinced me to get behind a group like MoveOn.org, which is trying to combat this.  These right wing extremists are dangerous, I believe.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      That darn freedom of speech is so troublesome when exercised by those you disagree with.

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Screaming so that there can be no discussion and inciting violence is NOT the political freedom of freedom of speech.

        I support your right to say that McCarthyism was right on target, but I will fight that kind of thinking at every point of the way.  I believe it, ie, to be insane.

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Funny how it becomes "screaming" when the message is one you disagree with, and violence is "incited" by whomever you decide regardless of who is on the recieving end of it.


          Principles can be such malleable things...

          1. profile image0
            Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            No.  CNN is actually having some journalistic backbone and reporting what is really happening for once. 

            People are screaming so much and creating violent situations that the town hall meetings are being closed down.  They are literally screaming so much that nobody can have a discussion--nobody.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              But if you agreed with them they would be crying out for justice, be the victims of violence, and be demanding that the will of the people be heard...


              Always the same old same old...

              1. profile image0
                Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                If I was agreeing with them, of course I would be protesting in long and eloquent paragraphs...speeches.  That is the point.  And I would not be inciting violence.  That is also the point.

                And the bottom of this 'movement' is not the truth.  It is intellectual dishonesty promulgated by certain money-oriented interests--and this has played on some people's most base fears.  This is my belief.

  31. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    I echo your sentiments Lita.  As you can see several people have already jumped to the conclusion that Obama is a Communist, and that McCarthy is a national hero.  Interestingly even Eisenhower and his Republicans colleagues considered him to be an blithering paranoid towards the end of his term in office.  I will definitely check out the website you posted.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Who said either of those things?

    2. earnestshub profile image80
      earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      It always surprises me that some people do not bother with the truth, just their prejudices. Putting people in categories like McCarthy did is the worst form of political shorthand. It does not teach or educate anyone about the political system.

  32. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    It looks McCarthy has somewhat of a cult following posthumously lol.

    1. profile image0
      Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah.  Wow, is all I can say.  But it doesn't surprise me.  Now I've heard that, ie, Palin thinks Obama has some sort of 'death panel' focusing on special needs children (?)

      It just gets weirder and weirder.  And when are people with common sense going to stop 'giving equal time' to this kind of stuff in a politically correct way and start calling this what it is?  Crazy.  I'm calling it crazy.

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        It is crazy, I agree with that.  I think maybe I am too politically correct sometimes.

        1. profile image0
          Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I'm not talking about you.  I'm talking about us all, and our sense of 'fair play.'  And the media...how it reports the news.  Which I don't support--balanced reporting is NOT 4-5 different versions of spin.

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Well I feel that I have been too politically correct to be honest smile.

    2. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I doubt that.

  33. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    I know my history and no contradiction there smile. Of course you did not answer my questions and only tried to speak down to me lol. You never seem to appreciate the knowledge other people have.  If they were parroting your ideology maybe, but that is about it. One thing I can say about a few others on here is they are very respectful towards me.  As I said McCarthyism is considered The Salem Witch Trial of the day, and if you cannot see this I feel sorry for you. 

    Lucille Ball may have voted for the Communist party at one time, but she was no threat to the US government of any kind.  McCarthy is  considered a nut and a coward, and your trying to defend him pointless.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      No, she did not.

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        You just said she did lol.  What are the two official languages of Pitcairn Island by the way?  What is the main crop of the Serrano Indians?  You never did answer my questions.

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          No I did not. Reading, reading...

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I read very well thank you.  I appreciate your compliment smile.  That is the nicest thing you have said.  Thank you so much smile.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              Come again? I'm sorry but there was no compliment there (and no insult either).

              ????????????????

              1. SweetiePie profile image82
                SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                I take it as a true compliment.  No need to explain smile.

                1. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Well, ok. Are you sure you don't need me to explain the difference between registering to vote and actually voting?

                  1. SweetiePie profile image82
                    SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    I know the difference, but I was playing around with you here.  You are so serious sometimes I just have to lighten the mood.  Try it once and awhile.  You never did answer my questions above.

        2. jiberish profile image78
          jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Please explain how your question is relevant to this discussion?

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Many posters ask off topic questions on this forum, so I can do so too.  Basically I was just curious how much people know about various aspects of world history because on several occasions I have been told I am intellectually lazy or a lazy hippie.  You did not say these things, but I just am trying to show a few posters here that there are many various ways of viewing the world and history, and their slant on it is not the only one.

            Implying that hippies are lazy or weird is also very biased and had nothing to do with the discussion.

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
              Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              What is the main crop of serrano indians?  Anything to do with serrano peppers?

              1. profile image0
                Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                How did the Sinagua Indians get their name?  What is the "Meeting of Pai" in Havasuipai Falls every year? wink.  Ron.  This is close at hand.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I wonder what the "Sinagua" actually called themselves.

                  1. profile image0
                    Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                    I actually used to know that...but its been a couple days since I visited one of those ruins around here.  You live right by the university.  You should know!

                    wink

  34. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    That's how it always is with the 'other guys.'

    1. profile image0
      Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You know, that's quite post-modern of you, TK.  Some sort of belief system that there are no universals and no truths out there.  I would posit the opposite opinion.  And actually, on the over-hackneyed conservative/liberal scale, with 'other guys,' et al, that's quite a conservative thought coming from me, you understand.

      You actually stand with the moral relativists...generally characterized (or portrayed) as liberals.

      Interesting, that.

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        No, just pointing out hypocrisy.

        1. profile image0
          Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          And how do you know that isn't a simplistic answer?  Or that it absolutely has to be a simplistic answer, based on interests which actually are other than your best interests, or are actually your own?

          That's existential, I realize.  And probably, posted here and in this company, perhaps more insane than crazy old people with medicare screaming at town hall meetings about socialized health care.

          I literally need a drink.

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Seems like you need to stop drinking.

            1. profile image0
              Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              I literally do not drink.  Nothing for maybe 3 months...

              Glass of Merlot is tasting good, though, tonight.  smile

  35. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Every group has hypocrisy, so there is nothing new there.  What I do not understand is why you think McCarthyism was a good thing when it ruined the political, artistic and acting careers of many.  The first amendment gives people the right of freedom of speech, and McCarthy went so far of the deep end he started accusing way too many people of plotting to overthrow the US government.  Do you really see I Love Lucy as a threat to America?   I love that show by the way!

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Did I say that? Pay attention.

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        I do pay attention and my detailed posts, hubs, and links show it.  If you ever bother to read some of my hubs you would notice the amount of time and care I put into these.  Yes you did imply that McCarthyism was a good thing because as of yet I have not heard you say one bad thing about it.  Also, someone wanting a drink does not mean they drink too much.  I think you owe Lita an apology.

        1. profile image0
          Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Don't bother, SP.  I understand the..uh..parameters.  lol smile

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You are right about that smile.

        2. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          .................................................. hopeless...


          ...logic has been abandoned....

  36. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago
  37. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    tksensei,

    It is not logical for you to ask me questions, and never to answer mine.  You have very little respect for the fact I am an educated woman. 

    Fox news is not very balanced.  You might want to read this article:

    http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067

    As a history major I learned it is good to read widely and not be narrow in your research.  I definitely consider myself a good historian, and find it amusing that several men have put me down. Of course they refuse to apologize, how typical lol.  I am definitely beginning to see I have been singled out because a couple actually told other hubbers that did not agree with them that they were smart in their own ways, but I have been accused of being intellectually lazy, uninformed, and a hippie slacker.  Interestingly it was all men that said those things to me, and but I never poke fun at them. 

    I know you do not like to hear me stand up for myself, so I decided to do it once again.  It is illogical to use a computer to put someone down by the way.  Would you question people in public the way you do on the forum?

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      .............here we go again...

  38. earnestshub profile image80
    earnestshubposted 14 years ago

    SweetiePie, I have noticed that the smart women like you and Lita get an amazing amount of unwarranted put downs, not-so-smart comments, and downright abuse.
    I would like to point out that I hold both of you in high regard, which is very easy, as you both hold your own in any company intellectually, you are modest about your knowledge and always decent even when attacked.
    I expect you will not get any apologies, so I wanted to let you know that you are more highly regarded generally than your antagonists.

  39. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    I appreciate at that earnest smile.  I think Lita definitely deserves an apology, but I will not hold my breath.

  40. world of the wise profile image66
    world of the wiseposted 14 years ago

    Money caused the economic crisis, bse of money some one was chased out of her home, another from her land and anothers car has been confiscated by creditors. If money wasnt herem all of would have been happy with batter trade

  41. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    According to the most recent Quinnipiac poll 52 percent disapprove of Obama's handling of the issue of health care while 39 percent approve.

  42. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 14 years ago
  43. Earthscribe profile image77
    Earthscribeposted 14 years ago

    Hi everyone,

    I've been doing a lot of thinking about the Health bill, the actual role of government in private affairs, and how a forum conversation had been going...

    I don't recall where it is now, but a few of us had been talking about the merits (or demerits!) or government run healthcare.

    I made a statement that I didn't want my taxes being used to pay for mass-healthcare. However, upon thinking it over that statement needs modification.

    As a libertarian, my personal political leaning is based on governemntal non-interference with the individual. This does not come from a paranoid abjuration, but from economy of energy; I think it is more effective to teach a person to fish rather than give them a fish.

    Hence I think welfare programs are less effective than job training and subsidized education; low-income housing/section 8 is less effective than HUD programs or low-downpayment leasing.

    Rather than paying out the nose through a monster of bureaucracy to care for the masses, energy might be better spent assisting others to raise their own quality of living -- health education, preventative medicine, and job training/education to raise salaries. This is a longer term focus -- healing the wound instead of putting a band aide on a bleeding gash.

    Those in the Liberal pole of dichotomies may see me as conservative, since I do not wish to eek out monies blindly to bureaucracy in a wide-cast net of general healthcare. Those in the conservative pole see me as a bleeding heart liberal because I do have social concerns and I want to see mechanisms in place to assist my fellow-citizens. But the truth lies somewhere above these, as if liberal and conservative were the base of a triangle -- I stand in a floating point above these --- for they are bothe needed.

    Which is more essential on a steering wheel -- the left grip or the right grip? Neither...both... it depends on the direction you are willing the vehicle to travel.

    Mistake this not for relativism -- for the road of social development is an absolute! I just think that today's complexities demand a higher resolution of direction.

    In the end, I would note that I think children should be covered completely for medical needs. They are not developed citizens able to shape their own destinies yet -- so I feel a social responsibility to contribute to their welfare, even if they aren't "mine"; all too often parents are neglectful or unable to provide.

    However conservation kicks in when I think of adults. Once they are 18, I say sink or swim -- as far as free hand outs go. Train them? yes. Educate them? Assist them to begin, yes. But across the board care? Nay.

    I could have written a hub, I know. But then I couldn't come here to share my thoughts ("Look guys, I just wrote a hub inspired by our conversation"... I don't think so.)

    1. ledefensetech profile image67
      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not so sure I agree about the kids thing.  Having kids is a personal decision from a couple and as part of that decision, they have to assess the costs of raising a kid, which includes their healthcare.  When you make exceptions for groups, you start on a slippery slide that ends us up where we are today.

      For instance, why make the age 18?  Why not 16 or 21?  Isn't 18 just an arbitrary age picked so that we could send kids to fight a war when we still have enforced military slavery?  Don't some people mature faster than others?  What about people who never mature?  You know, the 40-somethings that still act like they're still in high school?

      1. Earthscribe profile image77
        Earthscribeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Excellent points. I'll have to consider them.

      2. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        What ever you guys tend to talk about...  I just want you to know that I always appreciate your well considered and intelligent ideas.  We shouldn't fool ourselves!  We need you smart conservative-leaning types in any ongoing political discourse.  We need more of you.

        1. ledefensetech profile image67
          ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Thank you Lita.  It's not so much conservatism as it is accepting individualism, liberty and working out how that works in society.

  44. Randy Godwin profile image60
    Randy Godwinposted 14 years ago

    Just wondering, did anyone see the list of congressmen receiving millions from pharmaceutical companies, dental associations, insurance companies, etc lobbying for the plan to not pass?  Most are republicans of course, but surprise, surprise, the others are the "bluedog" democrats.  The pharmaceutical industries by themselves are spending over a million dollars a day in lobbying efforts.  It's all about the money people, the right and wrong of the plan is just a minor detail.  The worst politicians money can buy.

    1. Earthscribe profile image77
      Earthscribeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Quite right Randy. That's what worries me about any public mechanism having the major leverage -- it can be bought by special interests. If we could just circumvent the political apparatus -- ie, keeping healthcare in the priovate sector -- we'd at least have a shot at quality control.

      My my, what would pharmo companies do if people learned to heal themselves? Pipedream, yes, but the implications stagger me. Much like what gaining zero-point energy would do to utility companies.

      The behemoths of business may eventually be withered away by starving them of capital, by instituting decentralized solutions. Now that's another pipedream... but shoot for the stars, you might get the mountain.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image60
        Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Big business seems in no danger of losing their hold on the government.  How can we ordinary citizens compete with companies able to spend millions to have their way with congress?  I can get my meds from Canada for less than my insurance will pay even though they are produced in this country.  Pay insurance premiums and then pay co-pays too when visiting the doctor or buying drugs.  Go to the hospital and pay $10.00 per aspirin.  Blatant thievery!  I do not think private companies should be able to lobby government officials.  Just another name for a bribe.

        1. ledefensetech profile image67
          ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          That's why we the people need to enforce a strict interpretation of the Constitution.  That alone would doom big business and get the government out of the economy entirely and bribing officials would not benefit businesses anymore.

  45. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Very good guess.  Actually the main crop of the Serrano Indians is ground up acorn meal.  The word Serrano comes from the Spanish meaning someone who lives in the higlands or mountains.  The serrano pepper is from the Mexican state of Hidalgo, and the Serrano Indians are named so because they lived in the Morongo mountain range, which is here in Southern Californa.  The Serrano Indians also had camps up in the San Bernardino Mountains during the fall time.  During the fall they often came up to the mountains to grind their corn meal on the metatees.

  46. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    Sinagua means without water in Spanish, but it would be interesting to know their actual name.  I still do admire the Spanish names though, but I have always been fascinated with the language.  Just need to learn to speak it better smile.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The Spanish names are interesting, but they also can be seen as the remnants of their cultural destruction.  Many of the gaps in our knowledge of indiginous peoples are there because the information was destroyed by the conquistadors and their priests.

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        All Europeans that colonized the New World definitely destroyed the native cultures and traditions.  However, the Spaniards were actually less destructive than the English, and even the
        French.  Even though Catholic missionaries attempted to convert the native populations, many actually kept remnants of their traditional religions and mixed these with Catholicism. 

        The modern day descendants of the Incas in Peru are a good example.  The English on the other hand and later the Americans were more a about purposely eliminating entire populations, whereas Native Americans could be citizens and landholders under Spanish law.  When it comes to English and later American settlers respect for native culture, there was little of it in the early years. 

        It would not be until the Massacre at Wounded Knee in 1890 that a large number of Americans began to realize how decimating and assimilating other cultures is often brutal and barbaric.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Natives could hold land and had similar lives to Americans in the early years.  I was stunned to learn that Cherokees owned plantations in Georgia and Tennessee complete with African slaves.

        2. profile image0
          Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yep.  Round here, next to "Skull Valley," where there was a brutal Indian massacre, they celebrate, "Exodus Day," commemoration of forced march of a couple Indian tribes through the Sonoran desert in the summer heat, with hopes that they would all be killed off.

        3. ledefensetech profile image67
          ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Speak for yourself.  People in the US don't know anything about being second class citizens.  Just ask any Mexican Indios how much equality they find back home.

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Today there is a lot of economic inequality in Mexico, which is why people have left en masse.  Back during the 1800's Mexican Indios were being treated far more decently than Native American tribes here in the US.  We had a policy of Indian removal and  extermination.  The percentage of people with full Native American ancestry in Mexico far outranks that of the US, which illustrates how disease, removal, and extermination blotted out large numbers of people.

            Presidents in Mexico have been full blooded Native Americans, and the US has only elected our first ethnically mixed person recently.  There were many rich land owners of full Native American blood in Mexico and Latin American countries, and that has not been the same in the US up until recent years with Indian casinos.  The research in these fields confirms that.  Please do not speak down to me.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              ..........................  roll

              1. jiberish profile image78
                jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Your arrogance is a little unflattering, Sweet.

                1. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  And it doesn't get any better through constant repetition.

            2. ledefensetech profile image67
              ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

              Lady, I don't know who you think you are, but I have family down there.  In fact, there are parts of my family that won't speak to other parts of my family because they're not blue blooded enough.  Now I don't care what studies you've read or what you think you know, but I've been there and I've experienced it.  Have you?  If not, then all you're doing is speaking out of your rear end.  You claim to be educated but all you show is an unfounded arrogance in you so-called knowledge.  Perhaps you should be a little less "American's are the devil" and do some real research and reading in history.  All you've shown is that your teachers are biased and rather than teaching you to think, have indoctrinated you with a particular world view.  Sorry you don't like what I say, but if you can refute me with facts then do so.

              1. SweetiePie profile image82
                SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Your first sentence tells me I should have no self-respect of confidence, but I am not going to go away just because you think I am not worthy.  I never said Americans are the devil, but if you do not realize what happened to Native Americans at the Battle of San Creek and Wounded Knee then you are misinformed.  I share the real facts in my post and I am chuckling that you even can stand there are refute me!  Women and men had their body parts cut off their dead bodies at the Battle of San Creek, which was actually a massacre. Unarmed elderly men, women, and children were fired upon at the Battle of Wounded Knee, and you can read this for yourself in the first hand documents of the time. Any man who tells a woman she is arrogant is no gentleman.

                I have read scholarly books on the subject and done my research. Your language is way out of line for this forum, and you do not even know how to speak to a lady.  You are full of venom and hate.  Glad not to be you!  I know scholars who studied and worked at Mexican universities for ten years.  Stop disparaging people and find a real hobby.  Your words are way out of line.

                Mexico has had land owners and presidents that were full blooded Native American, which goes to show you do not know your research.  Mexico has more full blooded Native Americans percentage wise than the US, which is a fact you can gather from census research.  You were not alive during the events I described in the 1800's, so the reality from which you speak is your modern one.  Some see only what they want to see.  As for arrogance, I think you have enough to go around.

                1. ledefensetech profile image67
                  ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Nice, no facts again.  It's sad how you don't name any of these so called scholars or any of their works.  That's proof, that's providing facts.  That's intellectual exchange.  None of that is what you do.  I'm sorry you can't effectively make points in a discussion and have to resort to hackneyed lines like "you're not a real gentleman".  If you can't play with the big boys, maybe you need to go back to the playground with the little kids.

                  Do atrocities happen in war?   Of course they do.  Try studying the French and Indian War or the War of 1812.  Of course then you'd find that the evil white people were the ones being butchered and that just doesn't fit into your world view, does it?  If you knew anything about how natives are treated south of the border in all Latin American countries, you'd know that they are second class citizens.  Things there are worse than they were here during the Jim Crow years.  Yet there are no evil white people to blame, so you gloss over all of that.  You keep saying how intelligent you are, but you do little to show it.

                2. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  What, ever? So, no women are ever arrogant, or what?

                3. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I don't think I saw anyone deny those events.

  47. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years ago

    http://img.timeinc.net/recipes/i/recipes/su/03142008/corn-muffin-su-1634808-l.jpg

    1. profile image0
      Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      For real!  And those desert foods are so healthy, too.

      That's why they've found AZ Indians have such a high diabetes rate--the desert food sources have like, 300% the nutritional values of the stuff we Anglos eat.

      Cool, thanks!  smile

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        Unfortunately their indigenous foods were replaced with sugar, refined flour, and hydrogenated lard giving them an incredibly high rate of diabetes.

  48. SweetiePie profile image82
    SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

    The Cherokees were a few of the exceptions.  I am talking of the US policy of removal and widespread destruction, which eventually happened to the Cherokee too.  Through out the Spanish colonies there were many Native American land holders, and they had the same right as white Spaniards.  No one forced them to leave as with the Cherokees.  When English and Americans came in they forced the Native Americans to migrate farther and farther West, until they were finally asked to move onto reservations.  I do not consider missionary schools and the forced assimilation in the US to be as benign as the Spanish Catholicism.  Both are bad, but what the Americans did was far worse.

    1. countrywomen profile image60
      countrywomenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      SweetiePie- My husband and his office friends together went to a Casino in Native Indian reservation near Seattle. My husband/his friends spoke to an old man who told him that the government benefits of having only them have Casinos and other business has harmed them a lot. I will ask my husband more details later. smile

      1. SweetiePie profile image82
        SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

        The casinos have been of benefit to many Native American tribes here in California.  There are good and bad aspects, but it has brought in much need money and job for tribes such the Morongo community.  The Morongos actual give money back to many of the surrounding communities, which shows their commitment to community spirit.

        Back in the 90's and again last year Las Vegas backed lobbies have tried to block the expansion of casinos of Native American tribes.  I find Vegas to be a little of the greedy side, which is why I never really enjoy it there.  If I go to a casino I would rather support our local Morongo Indians personally because they do many things to help our community.

        1. countrywomen profile image60
          countrywomenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I just asked my husband and he briefly told me. Based on his feedback if somebody is a silent partner and it is actually being run by somebody else then the native Indians are getting used to an unhealthy "easy" life. Btw I rarely go to casinos. My husbands friends play poker and sometimes go to Casino near Seattle. smile

          1. SweetiePie profile image82
            SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            That is one take on the issue.  It may be that way for the reservation he visited, but the Morongos are certainly not becoming dependent on an unhealthy lifestyle.  People love gambling and gaming, and while there are unhealthy addictions to it, not everyone goes to that extreme.  The Indian Casinos actually have brought more positive things into the community such as jobs, and money for educational programs.  Many tribes even use this money to teach the upcoming generations about what is still left of their languages and cultures.  If anyone is going to get the money for casinos I would rather see it go to tribes such as the Morongo than to Las Vegas.  I actually do not even like to gamble all the much and mostly go for the great buffet.

  49. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 14 years ago

    Jealousy is a very unflattering trait.

    wink

  50. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 14 years ago

    Life would be so much more easy pleasy, lemon squeezy, if some just listened to their elders and accepted so-called slavery, damn.

    :0)  >80) big_smile

    1. SweetiePie profile image82
      SweetiePieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Personally I will continue to speak out, but I know this often meets criticism smile.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)