Skip to content

The History of Just Say No

John Sherffius
© John Sherffius

Share

46 Comments

  1. Anonymous wrote:

    But both of those things are going bankrupt!

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 1:03 am | Permalink
  2. Anonymous wrote:

    Actually, Medicare isn’t bankrupt. Social Security wouldn’t be in trouble if it wasn’t for Reagan, et al, robbing it at gun point to give it away as corporate welfare.

    Systems work, just that (certain) Republicans are idiots.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 1:06 am | Permalink
  3. aj wrote:

    Why the five pointed stars on every badge?

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 5:44 am | Permalink
  4. Billy wrote:

    Because it’s a political cartoon smart guy.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 6:43 am | Permalink
  5. Jack wrote:

    The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 8:41 am | Permalink
  6. John wrote:

    The problem with capitalism is that eventually the poor people are too poor to give their money to the wealthy.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 8:47 am | Permalink
  7. Alex wrote:

    Hammer and sickle? THE USSR WAS COMMUNIST.
    God damnit, you moron Republicans are fucking retarded.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 8:58 am | Permalink
  8. Anonymous wrote:

    The problem with John is he doesn’t know how capitalism works.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 10:31 am | Permalink
  9. Iron Knee wrote:

    The problem with this country is that it stopped actually being capitalist a long time ago.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 10:41 am | Permalink
  10. muffler wrote:

    The problem is we don’t have real capitalism anymore. We have corporatism. If we had capitalism we would have shorter intellectual property ownership periods, shorter patent ownership periods, more and smaller companies in industries and fair regulation. If we had the above we wouldn’t have a health care crisis or a bank crisis.

    Sorry but you can’t read only the parts of Adam Smith you like.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 11:06 am | Permalink
  11. Kevin wrote:

    @ALEX: The buttons aren’t real buttons. These were drawn by the cartoonist.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 11:31 am | Permalink
  12. Robert wrote:

    @KEVIN: Have you seen the real protest signs the “Tea Party” people put up? They ARE that stupid.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 12:01 pm | Permalink
  13. marvin marks wrote:

    “capitalism” isn’t magic. The “good old days” sucked. socialism is actually a very very good thing. yes social security and medicare are socialism. If the average American understood that, the word “socialism” would have no power.

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 12:10 pm | Permalink
  14. Matt wrote:

    I bet the average American doesn’t know that social security programs were funded without the heavy hand of socialism.

    For instance: http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/friendly-societies-voluntary-social-security-and-more/

    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 9:48 pm | Permalink
  15. meh wrote:

    hey alex, look up what USSR stands for. then what communist and socialist mean.

    Wednesday, December 2, 2009 at 1:56 am | Permalink
  16. Bleh wrote:

    Haha good point MEH! Way to blow Alex

    Friday, December 4, 2009 at 12:35 am | Permalink
  17. Pieter wrote:

    Poor America is still afraid of that word socialism. They just don’t get it. It’s sad for the poor who are the ones who need this reform. Funny how it works for practically all other developed nations without them becoming communist hotbeds of revolution and global domination. Their right wing and big business have won again. Suckers!! Such ignorance does not deserve a break. But…. I pity the poor. For them it is hell.

    Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 2:02 am | Permalink
  18. You have never given a single penny to a corporation that you didn’t at some point voluntary agree to give. If you believe otherwise, then you’ve got grounds for a lawsuit. Check your mortgage contract. I bet you even agreed to pay every month, even if your house declines in value! Think about that for a moment. It’s ALL VOLUNTARY by design.

    Socialism, on the other hand, is force. It is theft. Theft is wrong.

    And no, what The United States has is *not* capitalism. Capitalism is a philosophy of free, voluntary, and mutually-beneficial exchange. When large corporations support health insurance “mandates” because it disproportionately hurts their smaller competitors, for example, that is not capitalism. That is government coercion, or, as mentioned above, corporatism.

    Why something as obviously broken as Socialism has any traction among the public these days, with literally dozens of examples of failed attempts, and hundreds of millions dead from starvation at the hands of the central planners and the Great Leaders, is completely beyond me. I have to wonder: what would a good counter example look like? Maybe, in a few decades, when the United States looks like 1989 East Germany, we’ll *just* *start* to get the idea… Government is not your friend.

    Saturday, March 6, 2010 at 2:01 am | Permalink
  19. Iron Knee wrote:

    Rubberlegs — Even if I accept your premise (that money paid to a corporation is voluntary, which I don’t) I don’t get your conclusion. In the same way that you can pick a different corporation to do business with, you can pick a different country to live in.

    You give the example of a mortgage contract, but unless I want to be homeless (or I’m rich), I pretty much have to sign a mortgage with some corporation, and I’d like to see a mortgage company that will let me pay back less money if my house declines in value!

    If you absolutely believe that government is never, ever your friend, then you would love living in Somalia.

    Saturday, March 6, 2010 at 9:46 am | Permalink
  20. Andrew wrote:

    @Iron Knee

    You do realize that even though the alternative seems distateful to you (being homeless) you are still given a choice and are not coerced into giving a corporation money. Heck, you can go into the woods and built yourself a house if you want.

    Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 6:28 pm | Permalink
  21. Bemused wrote:

    Never cite “practically all other developed nations” without looking at the financials underneath them. Ever-growing debt levels – ones that actually currently exceed the US’s relative GDP:debt ratios – is what you’ll see under the covers of “practically all other developed nations”.

    Look around at the number of healthcare providers that are dropping and/or no longer accepting new Medicare/Medicade patients, and you can see that government-funded healthcare programs in the US are already failing.

    Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 6:52 pm | Permalink
  22. Philip wrote:

    @ Jack “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money” – Makes no sense – socialism simply advocates a government which does more things in society. This simply means socialism forces higher taxes. A side note in this is that the rich pay more taxes than the poor, and that the poor get to use more government products. This makes things more fair: the rich don’t get to pay themselves millions of dollars, and the poor are not forced to become dependent on something of which the measure of success is linearly dependent on the profit margin.

    Only idiots would advocate a system where the government does more, but demands less taxes. Socialists do not. Redistribution of wealth, not creation out of thin air (because that’s impossible).

    @ John – Only if the government does extremely little. (Case in point: Industrialist England). The US is relatively stable, with a 20% poverty rate, occasionally jumping up to 40% and rarely to 60%. The question is if you’re satisfied with that. Socialists are not, republicans are, and democrats are somewhere in between.

    @ Anonymous – He’s just taking the extreme version of it, EXACTLY like the Republicans are doing with socialism.

    @ Iron Knee “The US is no longer capitalist” NOT CAPITALIST? Capitalism means that the government does little to control the economy, which is free to strive towards as great as possible profit margins. More capitalism = less government involvement & more corporate freedom. Less capitalism = more government involvement & less corporate freedom. The corporations in the US are very free, compared to the rest of the world. The government in the US does extremely little to control the corporations, compared to the rest of the world.
    Take it from an independent observer: the US is very capitalist. You just don’t like the fact that Corporatism is the logical conclusion of Capitalism.

    @ Muffler “If we had captalism, we would have smaller companies” Not true. Large companies are capable of more massive mass production, thus decreasing the cost of each individual product while maintaining the same quality. Therefore they will achieve a greater profit margin, and therefore they will flourish in a capitalist society.
    It’s basic economics that large companies are less expensive to run than small companies. Capitalism naturally tends towards Corporatism.

    @ Muffler: “Strong author protection rules are a sign of corporatism”. The very purpose of author rights is the allow small companies to come up with ideas, and not immediately have those ideas been taken up by the big guys, who, as said above, are much more efficient and will therefore immediately make a better product. Author protection defends small companies, even if it also works for big companies if they have ideas. You clearly don’t understand economics.

    I’m sorry, but you can’t read a book and expect to know how the world works.

    @Meh – And the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (= North Korea) is very democratic and people-oriented. () Names don’t define the nature of the organization. Apple doesn’t work with orchards. Captain Crunchy doesn’t contain sailors. The Far East is actually to the west of America. Indians are not from India.

    @ Rubberlegs – Primary goods, those which fulfill the basic needs, are not effectively given voluntary. If you put someone in a position where they have to pay you all their money for enough food to last a day, they will eventually do so. To say that money is given voluntarily is as true as saying someone chose to stand in the path of a bullet, therefore it being their fault that they got shot.
    Beyond that lie goods which are hard to live without, and those which society demands you own – clothes, plumbing, cars, computers, mobile phones, electricity.

    Yes, you agree to buy all those products. But that does not mean that you think that deal was fair, and more importantly it does not mean that deal was fair. You can agree to things reluctantly. You can be forced to choose to see 10 people die or see 100 people die, where the third option is that all 111 die (you too). Given that there is no hope of rescue, you will be morally forced to kill the 10. You might even have to sign a contract stating that you do so willingly and with full agreement, and that you are happy to comply. But you will do so. Then, according to you, you wanted to murder 10 people. Does that seem correct to you?

    The US is capitalist, to near the extreme. Capitalism is not about freedom – that is liberalism (or it’s extreme, anarchism). Capitalism is about making money. Capitalism, extremely simplified, is “Whoever makes the most money wins”.
    When a corporation does something for profit, that is capitalism. The US government is a democracy. What the government does is extremely likely to be the will of the people. Therefore, it is not government coercion, but government action. And as said above, corporatism is capitalism left to it’s own accord.

    Socialism is not broken. Europe is in a better shape then America, and it has more socialism. America itself has many socialist aspects – school buses, public libraries, government funding for churches, museums, schools and monuments, the police, the US army (it is a service for the people, therefore it’s a product, one which is provided by the government), social security, food quality checks, health and safety regulations, clean drinking water checks – 90% of which are completely natural to you and you could hardly live without. You are not at the end of the “capitalist” vs “socialist” spectrum, and you are too ignorant to realize it.

    Central Plans and Great Leaders – both elements of Stalinist Communism, which is a dictatorship. That is not socialism in any way that socialists support, any more than you support child labor 14 hours a day, 6 days a weak (which is what Capitalist Industrialist England came to).

    A counter example? Well, Sweden. Highly socialist, not communist at all, and in an extremely good economic, social and moral state.

    Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 11:43 am | Permalink
  23. Unix Drummer wrote:

    Iron Knee,

    I agree with your point about choosing the country you live in. That’s a reason I don’t understand why so many people immigrate and then go around saying they hate America, it makes no sense!

    I do, however, disagree with your point that the money you give corporations is involuntary. While not signing a mortgage does usually mean you will be homeless, that does not take away from the fact that you voluntarily bought the house. If it TRULY was involuntary, you would be signing your mortgage and signing the legal documents for the house at gunpoint (which I’m assuming you wouldn’t be). Sure, people have a right to shelter, but that’s what homeless shelters, apartments, and places like the YMCA are for. If you want the space, freedom, and privacy of a private home you have to acquire that yourself.

    Consider for a second if you could buy a house without a mortgage and without being rich. You pay a very small amount but still get the house. So now the workers don’t get paid as much, which of course would cause an outrage from home builders (carpenters, masons, etc). So of course they would need paid somehow, and since you didn’t pay, other people would be forced to pay the difference. But if YOU didn’t pay, then why should I pay? So then a trend would form in society where no one wants to pay for their houses anymore, but the workers still need a salary so those with excess (whether classified as “rich” or not) would be forced to pay the difference. Eventually, no one in society would pay there way and as previously stated, you would run out of other people’s money.

    My big point here is that saying, “I have to involuntarily buy a house because if I don’t, then I’m homeless,” doesn’t really count as involuntary because you don’t actually NEED a house. It certainly is better to have one, don’t get me wrong, but you are never forced to buy one. Just like if you say, “I am forced to buy a car because if I don’t then I have no vehicle,” doesn’t hold, because you don’t NEED a car. Plenty of people in cities live without cars, and some families even have multiple generations who have never even had a driver’s license.

    Just my two cents.

    Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 9:18 pm | Permalink
  24. Scandanavia Fan wrote:

    Socialism does work for lots of nations. Most of the Scandinavian countries have a form of social democracy where the people pay 60% tax, or so, and in return get guaranteed education, nanny, health-care, roads, and high speed Internet (Sweden only).

    Socialism should not be a dirty word here in America. We have several social programs that some on these boards have already mentioned. I don’t see why health-care would be that big of a leap. It helps the poor, helps the middle class and hurts the rich.

    At old rubber legs: Where are these hundreds of failures and thousands dead? Socialism is just another form of governmental structure. It and democracy are not mutually exclusive.

    Saturday, March 20, 2010 at 2:42 pm | Permalink
  25. Fred wrote:

    Actually, Social Security and Medicare are both going bankrupt. Social Security wouldn’t be if they hadn’t been spending all the excess dollars coming in every year. Even still, it still worked until the demographics of a big generation (Baby Boomers) followed by a much smaller generation bit it in the ass. It is essentially a Ponzi scheme the way it has been operated. There is no “lockbox” and never has been. They have spent Social Security money on other things for all these years. Now it is time to pay the piper and no politician will touch the issue because the options are: lower benefits, raise social security taxes or raise the retirement age. They probably need to do all three. Oops!

    In regards to healthcare, why can’t they start by working on eliminating waste and fraud? Seems like a good first step. Next, create more competition for insurance by eliminating state restrictions. Next, enact tort reform to lower malpractice insurance and scale back all the “cover your ass” tests that doctors currently perform. That is a huge waste of money. After that we can see what else needs fixing.

    Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 6:45 am | Permalink
  26. Iron Knee wrote:

    Yes, and if people can’t afford bread, then let them eat cake! Problem solved!

    Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 3:42 pm | Permalink
  27. Busted wrote:

    I love the fantastic ability for self-delusion that allows a person to say, with a straight face, “If we just removed ALL restrictions on the way companies do business, it would benefit the consumer because the market will force companies to do the right thing”.

    Maybe that was the case 100 years ago (although the evidence suggests otherwise), but I feel like I’m taking crazy pills whenever I hear someone say that what’s good for the insurance companies is good for the patients. REALLY? REALLY? I mean, you think being denied for pre-existing conditions is good for the patient?

    What it comes down to, regardless of the rhetoric, is “I got mine, screw everyone else”. I don’t know whether to blame ignorance or a complete ethical deficit, but I find it astonishing. Otherwise rational people believing that corporations would do so much good in the world, if only we didn’t regulate their ability to do evil…it makes me laugh.

    Monday, March 22, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Permalink
  28. gus wrote:

    @scandinavian fan: sweden ranks #1 in the economist’s democracy index, with the other 4 scandinavian countries all in the top 6, and they are quite socialized.

    and capitalism is just Darwin’s survival of the fittest applied to economics. the better business succeeds. but survival of the fittest doesn’t really apply now with what we’re doing to helping people not get sick and having eliminated any threat of being wiped out by saber toothed tigers. socialism just has people helping each other out more. taxes are sorta like forced charity, and what’s wrong with charity?

    and also, we honestly shouldn’t be paying absurd prices for seeing the doctor, or we shouldn’t be paying absurd prices for some company to pay the doctor. the firemen don’t hand you a bill when they finish putting the fire in your house out, the police don’t ask to see your credit card after they investigate a crime committed against you, and you should have to pay multiple thousands of dollars to have a life-threatening tumor removed from you brain!!!

    Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at 12:06 am | Permalink
  29. Busted wrote:

    Gus, you make a lot of good points. The standout point being that Capitalism is economic Darwinism. I’ve always found that funny for two reasons: Attack Capitalism and get your head ripped off for being a communist. Defend Social Darwinism (not that I’ve tried) and somebody like me rips your head off for being…well…EVIL.

    The other thing that’s always seemed odd to me is that the fundamentalist religious right are so pro-capitalism…and so anti-evolution. I mean, how do you defend capitalism as a morally just system without pointing to evolution as a natural and therefore “right” thing?

    In a world less crazy than our own, the creationists would almost certainly reject a Darwinist economic system and the atheists would be defending it. (A lot of atheists *are* defending it, but at least they’re not hypocrites).

    Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 7:42 am | Permalink
  30. Anonymous wrote:

    Hehe, I love when people point out how much Socialism fails. Hehe. That’s right folks, there is no such thing as public libraries, and those roads you drive on everyday. They’re just a part of your imagination. And be sure not to get your mail today; it isn’t there. Don’t bother calling 9-11, it’s probably someone else’s phone number than a socialized police force. And employers, if ajob seeker claims to have a High School diploma, be sure to make sure it is real, there is a lot of fake schools out there. And lastly, cancel all studies on current Western European governments, none of them have had a government in over 60 years.

    I’m not a supporter of “isms” as they’re overly idealistic and impractical and simply don’t work. But the fact that we deny these systems don’t work altogether is as narrow-minded as the “isms” themselves.

    Saturday, March 27, 2010 at 11:46 am | Permalink
  31. Maxboldeau wrote:

    Funny how when some will say they want less government, you never hear them say they want the federal out of the army. Isn’t it where most of the money goes?

    Saturday, March 27, 2010 at 9:26 pm | Permalink
  32. CD wrote:

    I love the way Socialism/Capitalism seem to be viewed as mutually exclusive. It is actually possible to have aspects of both systems in existance at the same time. I’m only really repeating what others have said here, but a socialistic system for the means to maintain a healthy population is essential IMHO. I can understand the argument “why should we pay for the welfare of others?”, well just consider it charitable giving and get that warm, fuzzy feeling that you’re doing some good in the world :)

    Sunday, March 28, 2010 at 10:14 am | Permalink
  33. Aaron wrote:

    @Philip

    That was awesome. Totally just shut everyone down on here. I wish there was someone like you on every blog post to just shut out all the trolls. Bravo!

    Sunday, March 28, 2010 at 12:43 pm | Permalink
  34. Jonny wrote:

    It comes down to one thing: accountability. Government corporations always become bloated, inefficient and to some extent corrupted because they have very little to no accountability. You don’t have to look further than say, your local post office for an example of this. Another example is the FDA. Some drug gets released and approved by the FDA but 10 years later is found to cause whatever problem and 80000 ambulance chasers hop on a class action lawsuit. It is the drug company that gets sued not the FDA which was in charge of approving the drug in the first place. That’s pretty messed up and this is part of the main reason why drugs are so expensive in America. If the FDA were privatized like the UL (Underwriter’s Laboratory; they approve electronic devices. Their seal is on pretty much every electronic device you own.) they would be held accountable for these shortcomings and the drug companies wouldn’t take huge hits. This would lead to cheaper drugs. Drug companies aren’t as evil as the media puts on and most drugs are actually money losers. The median profit for pharmaceutical companies is only 18% compared to the broadcast media’s median profit of 46%. And don’t say they’re cheaper in other countries like Canada: They pay less for SOME drugs because of price caps BUT they pay MORE than Americans do for generics which is why many Canadians come to America to buy drugs. That’s just one example

    Now if corporations start getting in bed with politicians (for example: the current insurance companies) this is no better because, again, they have no accountability. For example, your insurance company drops other people you know and people start complaining. This is bad customer service. However, due to fucked up antitrust laws, you have to buy insurance from your state and insurance companies typically have monopolies within their state. The insurance company has no recoil from unfairly dropping other people. They can do this because they know other people won’t drop from their plan because they pretty much have to buy insurance from them (not to mention insurance is tied to employment which is ridiculous and not only wastes money providing unnecessary coverage but also forces people to buy whatever insurance their employer wants them too). Just like government corporations, the insurance companies have no accountability and are therefore just as prone to become corrupt as the government.

    On a more specific note, I found something interesting in this Obama healthcare bill that has been passed. You are “mandated” to buy insurance but not really. You can opt out of it and pay a tax penalty that is much much lower than the cost of the “mandated” premiums. There’s also a part that says insurance companies can’t deny coverage because of a preexisting condition. Sounds good right? Here’s where I see the problem. What’s to stop a bunch of Americans from taking the cheaper tax penalty until, for example, they get cancer then say “oh I want insurance now even though I haven’t been paying premiums and you can’t deny me because it’s illegal”. Who’s paying this bill? It’s like not having car insurance until you get in a wreck then the car insurance companies are forced to provide you with insurance.

    If you want to fix the healthcare problem (or at least start) how about doing the following:
    1. Eliminate insurance corporatism and allow insurance companies to compete over state lines.
    2. Allow full dollar-to-dollar tax deductions for health premiums: Businesses can do this, why can’t you? This would allow millions of Americans who cannot currently afford insurance to be able to afford it.
    3. Privatize the FDA
    4. Expand Health Savings Accounts and decouple health insurance from employment

    What’s great about the above ideas is that THEY DON’T COST TAXPAYERS ANY MONEY!!!! You could try them for free, see if they work, then adjust it from there. It doesn’t add to the huge debt America is already in. Unfortunately, this won’t get passed because the insurance companies DON’T want that, the health care lobbyists DON’T want that, Barack Obama DOESN’T want that but guess what: THEY DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT YOU. They aren’t doing these thing because: even though all of us stand to gain, they themselves would lose.

    To everyone who condones socialism, actually read “The Wealth of Nations” and “The Origin of Species” and you may become a little more enightened. Corporations do become corrupt if they can, but they only can with government involvement. They key to socialism’s failing lies in a piece of Darwinian evolution in that deep down, everyone looks out for themselves above others, and this has manifested itself time and time again in both political and corporate corruption. Absolute power corrupts absolutely and the government is the only one who has that power and who can give it out to who they want (corporations). That’s human nature and you can’t fight it no matter how idealistic you are.

    @Gus: You have no idea the cost it takes to not only research all these new drugs and therapies but to implement them as well. It is not a fair comparison to police and firemen at all (a lot of firemen are volunteer anyway). It would be nice if the government could handle the finances of health care but compared to police force or fire department they are just exponentially more expensive. MRI machines, for example, cost around $3 million just to own not to mention the cost of maintenance and how many people you have to pay to run them. The human body is just way more complicated to understand and figure out and treat than say a fire. Treat with water. What will happen with that mentality is the buck will get passed until the real people who start taking cuts are the healthcare providers and they are the last people I want taking salary cuts. People see doctors making 150-400K and that’s alot but people don’t realize that if a person goes straight through the system they don’t start making money until after 8 years of school. That’s 8 years of debt with no income until residency, which is another 4-6 years, where doctors make only 40-60 K per year working 80 hours a week. This is not to mention the fact that you’ve asked the prospective doctor to basically give up their 20s studying, and I’m pretty sure those are the best years in people’s lives. I personally want my doctors making a shitload of money. This keeps competition for the field high causing survival of the fittest: the smartest students survive to become doctors.

    http://www.er-doctor.com/doctor_income.html
    Interesting article if you don’t believe me.

    @Phillip: America has not been truly capitalist since FDR. Social security was a great quick fix for a dying economy but social security has been a huge drain on the economy since and like someone said earlier, basically a ponzi scheme.

    Here’s a visual depiction of our nation’s budget:
    http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive/phd041410s.gif

    Friday, May 21, 2010 at 6:02 pm | Permalink
  35. Jonny wrote:

    “Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” ~Denis Diderot

    Friday, May 21, 2010 at 6:49 pm | Permalink
  36. Jonny wrote:

    Honestly, we’ve never had a truly capitalist economy, we’ve just been slightly less socialist than our European breather en, as you said.

    Friday, May 21, 2010 at 7:28 pm | Permalink
  37. Tom wrote:

    The comments on this post are better than the post itself!

    Tuesday, June 1, 2010 at 1:15 am | Permalink
  38. Mike wrote:

    I think that there are a lot of people (myself included) whose problem with socialism is not socialism itself, but rather a lack of faith that the government will spend the money wisely. If the government had shown in the last several decades that it can and will spend money wisely and without corruption, people would be much more willing to accept socialism. However, that has not been the case, and I believe that is why there is such a strong opposition to socialism. I would also like to point out that most of the ridiculous and corrupt government spending comes at a national level, and that people would be much more open to socialism at a state level.

    Monday, June 21, 2010 at 1:30 pm | Permalink
  39. Mtlhed wrote:

    It seems we have an intelligent flock of sheep here! You all seem to make valid points, but your points are futile. Of course weak and spineless men who don’t strive to be anything else,love the idea of big Government providing everything for them. But those of us who are independent and strive for self preservation and personal achievement will easily assure that America will stay the course and return to her original glory. You see your dependence is your weakness and by blatantly flaunting your weakness you provide us with ammunition, knowing what you desire only makes it easier for us to keep you from it. And when you have exhausted your resources and calmer more intelligent minds prevail, the Constitutionalists party will rise and return Government to a manageable size. Thus providing a working, functional Government for the people by the people. Returning ILLEGAL aliens to their rightful countries,securing all borders,abolishing the I.R.S. and the Federal Reserve are just a few of the items necessary for a greater America and just the beginning of the end of the so called Democracy, America was founded on the premise of a Republic Government and until it returns to that nothing else will be excepted. We the free people of America are fed up with your tired and your weak, our cup is running over with the needy and we have become very irritated with the sheepishly spineless who have brought this country to its knees. The Obama administration has become the perfect catalyst to ignite the fire of the strong and proud Americans who will no longer stand by and observe their destruction, our eyes have been opened and we will prevail. God bless America!

    Wednesday, July 21, 2010 at 3:07 am | Permalink
  40. Iron Knee wrote:

    Dear MTLHED (metalhead? Or Most Tender Lunk Headed Egomaniac Dweeb?). I totally cracked up at your post. Why is it that Red states consume more federal dollars than blue states? Why is it that oil companies, banks, and drug companies are only too happy to suck off the government teat? Why is it that tea partiers are screaming “hands off my Medicare”?

    I’ve lived in several countries with single payer health insurance and I am strongly for it. If you are calling me weak and spineless I’ll laugh in your face (I’ll pit my independence and personal achievement against yours any day). If you want to restore this country to some mythical original glory and return all illegal aliens to their rightful country, then unless you are a native american, you can just go home NOW.

    And your beloved Constitutionalist Party wants to turn the US into a theocracy governed by biblical law. As for reducing the government to a manageable size, they also state that they want to spend even more money on the military. Your eyes may have been opened, but you have definitely drunk the Kool-aid.

    Wednesday, July 21, 2010 at 4:45 pm | Permalink
  41. Damn Socialism, and their helpful ways…

    Tuesday, August 3, 2010 at 9:47 pm | Permalink
  42. Andy wrote:

    One question for those who support complete government control of healthcare.
    What do you have to say about the very common occurrence of people who have to wait MONTHS to get a simple MRI? Or a months long wait for surgery to remove a cancerous tumor? Or repair an aneurysm?
    There are many companies that help “Medical Tourists” from countries like the UK and Canada(countries that have “Universal Single Payer Health Care”)come to the US for timely life saving treatment that they’ve been denied in their home countries.
    If Universal Government Controlled Health Care is the end all, be all of human existence, why do these companies even exist, yet alone thrive?

    Monday, November 1, 2010 at 9:47 am | Permalink
  43. Iron Knee wrote:

    Andy, I’m not supporting “complete government control of healthcare”. I’m for single payer, like Medicare. That’s government control of health insurance, not control of health care.

    What about the thousands of people who DIE every year because they cannot afford health care, including having cancerous tumors removed? Even people with health insurance often cannot afford simple procedures because of deductibles, limits, exclusions and other expenses.

    And there are just as many companies that help medical tourists from the US go to other countries where they can get good health care but at affordable costs.

    If private health insurance is the end all, be all of human existence, they why has every single industrial country in the world gotten rid of it except for us?

    Instead of just repeating propaganda, why don’t you actually look into the situation?

    Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 12:57 pm | Permalink
  44. Britton wrote:

    @all of you

    Anarchism, it’s the best.

    That is all.

    Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 5:20 pm | Permalink
  45. Ryan wrote:

    @Iron Knee – If you control the money, you control the industry. All you get with a single payer system is someone else holding the “Benefits Denied” stamp.

    Monday, November 22, 2010 at 1:16 pm | Permalink
  46. Ryan wrote:

    Additionally, you want the same people who put an 8 year moratorium on stem cell research – a technology that is proving to hold significant promise for the cure of countless diseases? Don’t pretend like the federal government’s power pendulum won’t ever swing back in favor of the Republicans, because it will.

    Monday, November 22, 2010 at 1:31 pm | Permalink