Last night the only contestant I liked this year was voted off. Big Deal. We are left with what Fox Broadcasting thinks they will be able to sell as the next “Idol”. Yes, I believe the show is rigged, and no, they never really do a good job picking their winner.
This year’s winner is Crystal Bowersox, surprised? I’m not, the judges have been pimping her since day one. The worst part about it is that they do such a bad job pimping her. Young? Upbeat? My butt she is, she always sounds the same and she always sounds like a Janis Joplin knockoff, week after week. Lady, come out of your comfort zone and sing something different. Then and only then will you have a chance of convincing me you can sing.
And do something about the style issue too. The dreadlocks and clothes need work. The dreads make her look like she needs a good shower and scrubbing. They may be a style comment but to me they make her look filthy. And quit dressing like a trailer park diva. I know, she may actually be one, but there is no reason to advertise it. If I hear one more sob story about these people, I swear, I will puke. Now if Crystal really wants to win my vote (and I would vote hundreds of times for any contestant that did this) she will punch that gay little weasel Ryan Seacrest in his face (I would pay money to see that).
Stay tuned for my next blog, gonna make fun of “Twilight”
BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Now let’s irritate the HOMOPHOBES….
I read the following article online, it came from ABC Channel 7 News out of Denver and the stupidity (my personal opinion of course) of the people involved called out to me to blog on it. First read the article below and then I will continue.
Boys In Drag At School Riles Some Parents - Parent,
Blogger Call Lesson Part Of 'Gay Agenda'
GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press Writer
POSTED: 1:51 pm MDT April 14, 2010
UPDATED: 8:41 am MDT April 15, 2010
MAPLE SHADE, N.J. -- A teacher's explanation to parents of a women's history project planned for her third-graders contained these words: "If your child is a young man, he does not have to wear a dress or skirt."
That didn't stop a parent and a blogger from complaining that little boys were being asked to cross-dress as part of the "gay agenda." From there, the Maude Wilkins School's project about the evolution of women's clothing quickly took on a life of its own -- and now it's been called off completely.
"In hindsight," Superintendent Michael Livengood said Wednesday, "maybe a different activity could have been chosen that was a little bit more relevant to history."
It's the second time in six months that a New Jersey school program has attracted wide attention for something officials say was planned innocently. About 70 protesters visited a Burlington County school in October, upset about a song in which students praised President Barack Obama.
In both cases, administrators say, the ensuing uproar was due to blogs that spread the word but got the intent wrong.
The latest saga began this month when teacher Tonya Uibel sent a letter home with her pupils announcing that all third-graders at Maude Wilkins were required to participate in a Women's History Month project examining how women's fashion has changed over time.
The letter said, in part: "If your child is a young man, he does not have to wear a dress or skirt, as there are many time periods where women wore jeans, pants and trousers. However, each child must be able to express what time period their outfit is from. Most of all, your child should have fun creating their outfit and learning about how women's clothing has changed!"
Janine Giandomenico, a mother of a boy in the class and a frequent user of online social networks, posted a complaint on Facebook. By Monday, her concerns had worked their way to Warner Todd Huston, an opinion writer and editor of the Publius' Forum site. He skewered the school and suggested that the timing of the event, scheduled for Friday, was designed to coincide with a national "Day of Silence" to protest harassment of gays.
"Pushing the gay agenda while feminizing our young boys through a cross-dressing day? This isn't your parent's grade school celebration, for sure," he wrote.
On Monday, as the Web traffic swelled and national media outlets picked up on the story, principal Beth Norcia decided to cancel the fashion show. She wrote in a new letter to parents that instead, students would draw how women's fashion had evolved.
One third-grader, Elizabeth Heisler, said as school let out Wednesday that none of her classmates had seemed confused about whether boys were supposed to wear dresses. The cancellation of the fashion show means she doesn't get to wear her red and black "can-can" dress to school on Friday.
The episode confounded her mother, Andrea Heisler. "I would never think my son was going to come to school in an 1800s dress and petticoat," she said.
Livengood, who leads the Maple Shade Township school district, acknowledged that the initial letter could be misunderstood.
But he said the school wasn't trying to make anyone uncomfortable -- and wasn't even aware of the gay rights protests scheduled the same day.
"It's unbelievable to me that the wording of a letter to a group of third-graders has caused this," he said. "Do they really think that our little group of third-grade teachers has conspired to try to get boys to cross-dress?"
The district hasn't heard complaints from any parents besides Giandomenico, Livengood said.
She told The Associated Press via Facebook message that she would be available for an interview, but has not responded to subsequent requests. On her Twitter account, she had this to say: "WE WON-CANCELLED! THANKS 4 YR SUPPORT!"
Still, Livengood said, he's learned a lesson -- to make sure communications from teachers to parents are reviewed before they go out.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/education/23151571/detail.html
Interesting article isn’t it. Still trying to figure out how it was “Pushing the gay agenda”, since the letter specifically said boys did not have to wear dresses or skirts, now if the letter says they don’t have to wear dresses or skirts, then how is it promoting cross dressing? This is the quote from the letter (from the article above).
The letter said, in part: "If your child is a young man, he does not have to wear a dress or skirt, as there are many time periods where women wore jeans, pants and trousers. However, each child must be able to express what time period their outfit is from. Most of all, your child should have fun creating their outfit and learning about how women's clothing has changed!"
Sounds to me like the parent (and I use the singular because there was one, yes I said one, complaint) involved did not take the time to read the letter closely. Or maybe the parent had an axe to grind, who knows, all I know is that after reading the article, unless the letter contained information that was not said, I would not be able to look this parent in the eye without laughing at them for making a fool of themselves. Because if you pay attention to the wording “does not have to wear a dress or skirt” then you realize she made much ado about nothing. All she had to do was put the kids in blue jeans and say it was from the 1800’s, but no, we have to attack the school for “Pushing the gay agenda”. And then when it’s done she posts on Twitter; "WE WON-CANCELLED! THANKS 4 YR SUPPORT!". What did you win? You took away a project that the kids probably would have enjoyed because of your homophobia (and yes, that is what it is), cause ladies and gentlemen, whether you believe people are born homosexual, or that it’s a choice, it doesn’t matter, the school has your children 8 hours a day, you have them the rest of the time. And if you are active in your children’s lives then their beliefs will reflect in some way shape or form, your beliefs.
I also find another comment in the article interesting: “She told The Associated Press via Facebook message that she would be available for an interview, but has not responded to subsequent requests.” (guess they didn’t offer her enough money for an interview yet).
As for the blogger who helped, either he is a dupe, a homophobe or just looking for 15 minutes of fame. Don’t know which, don’t really care, have my opinion of him and the tone of the blog should make that clear.
*Historical Note: Men did not always wear pants, pants as we currently know it are a historically recent inventions, the last couple hundred years. Before that seeing a man in a skirt (Kilt for the educated out there) was not unusual. – But you tell them that and they will probably call you a liar or say your “Pushing the gay agenda”
And one last note on this, I bet, now that I have posted this blog, if they ever read about it, I will be accused of “Pushing the gay agenda” because I disagree with them. You see, people like this believe in free speech, as long as that free speech agrees with them, but if you don’t then you are obviously trying to help the other side, or are stupid, criminal, whatever. You are not allowed to disagree, see, the limited mind cannot handle that, there is only right and wrong, and they are obviously right and if you disagree, you are obviously wrong.
Don’t be a sheep, Think, before you speak, before you act, and especially before you vote. Don’t make decisions based on pretty words or how someone looks. Find out the truth and act accordingly. Because even if the truth for you is different than the truth for me (and yes, that is possible), at least your decision will be informed.
Spread the word, make your speech, actions and decisions informed.
Have a wonderful day.
"God created two kinds of people, those that are Irish, and those that want to be."
Boys In Drag At School Riles Some Parents - Parent,
Blogger Call Lesson Part Of 'Gay Agenda'
GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press Writer
POSTED: 1:51 pm MDT April 14, 2010
UPDATED: 8:41 am MDT April 15, 2010
MAPLE SHADE, N.J. -- A teacher's explanation to parents of a women's history project planned for her third-graders contained these words: "If your child is a young man, he does not have to wear a dress or skirt."
That didn't stop a parent and a blogger from complaining that little boys were being asked to cross-dress as part of the "gay agenda." From there, the Maude Wilkins School's project about the evolution of women's clothing quickly took on a life of its own -- and now it's been called off completely.
"In hindsight," Superintendent Michael Livengood said Wednesday, "maybe a different activity could have been chosen that was a little bit more relevant to history."
It's the second time in six months that a New Jersey school program has attracted wide attention for something officials say was planned innocently. About 70 protesters visited a Burlington County school in October, upset about a song in which students praised President Barack Obama.
In both cases, administrators say, the ensuing uproar was due to blogs that spread the word but got the intent wrong.
The latest saga began this month when teacher Tonya Uibel sent a letter home with her pupils announcing that all third-graders at Maude Wilkins were required to participate in a Women's History Month project examining how women's fashion has changed over time.
The letter said, in part: "If your child is a young man, he does not have to wear a dress or skirt, as there are many time periods where women wore jeans, pants and trousers. However, each child must be able to express what time period their outfit is from. Most of all, your child should have fun creating their outfit and learning about how women's clothing has changed!"
Janine Giandomenico, a mother of a boy in the class and a frequent user of online social networks, posted a complaint on Facebook. By Monday, her concerns had worked their way to Warner Todd Huston, an opinion writer and editor of the Publius' Forum site. He skewered the school and suggested that the timing of the event, scheduled for Friday, was designed to coincide with a national "Day of Silence" to protest harassment of gays.
"Pushing the gay agenda while feminizing our young boys through a cross-dressing day? This isn't your parent's grade school celebration, for sure," he wrote.
On Monday, as the Web traffic swelled and national media outlets picked up on the story, principal Beth Norcia decided to cancel the fashion show. She wrote in a new letter to parents that instead, students would draw how women's fashion had evolved.
One third-grader, Elizabeth Heisler, said as school let out Wednesday that none of her classmates had seemed confused about whether boys were supposed to wear dresses. The cancellation of the fashion show means she doesn't get to wear her red and black "can-can" dress to school on Friday.
The episode confounded her mother, Andrea Heisler. "I would never think my son was going to come to school in an 1800s dress and petticoat," she said.
Livengood, who leads the Maple Shade Township school district, acknowledged that the initial letter could be misunderstood.
But he said the school wasn't trying to make anyone uncomfortable -- and wasn't even aware of the gay rights protests scheduled the same day.
"It's unbelievable to me that the wording of a letter to a group of third-graders has caused this," he said. "Do they really think that our little group of third-grade teachers has conspired to try to get boys to cross-dress?"
The district hasn't heard complaints from any parents besides Giandomenico, Livengood said.
She told The Associated Press via Facebook message that she would be available for an interview, but has not responded to subsequent requests. On her Twitter account, she had this to say: "WE WON-CANCELLED! THANKS 4 YR SUPPORT!"
Still, Livengood said, he's learned a lesson -- to make sure communications from teachers to parents are reviewed before they go out.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/education/23151571/detail.html
Interesting article isn’t it. Still trying to figure out how it was “Pushing the gay agenda”, since the letter specifically said boys did not have to wear dresses or skirts, now if the letter says they don’t have to wear dresses or skirts, then how is it promoting cross dressing? This is the quote from the letter (from the article above).
The letter said, in part: "If your child is a young man, he does not have to wear a dress or skirt, as there are many time periods where women wore jeans, pants and trousers. However, each child must be able to express what time period their outfit is from. Most of all, your child should have fun creating their outfit and learning about how women's clothing has changed!"
Sounds to me like the parent (and I use the singular because there was one, yes I said one, complaint) involved did not take the time to read the letter closely. Or maybe the parent had an axe to grind, who knows, all I know is that after reading the article, unless the letter contained information that was not said, I would not be able to look this parent in the eye without laughing at them for making a fool of themselves. Because if you pay attention to the wording “does not have to wear a dress or skirt” then you realize she made much ado about nothing. All she had to do was put the kids in blue jeans and say it was from the 1800’s, but no, we have to attack the school for “Pushing the gay agenda”. And then when it’s done she posts on Twitter; "WE WON-CANCELLED! THANKS 4 YR SUPPORT!". What did you win? You took away a project that the kids probably would have enjoyed because of your homophobia (and yes, that is what it is), cause ladies and gentlemen, whether you believe people are born homosexual, or that it’s a choice, it doesn’t matter, the school has your children 8 hours a day, you have them the rest of the time. And if you are active in your children’s lives then their beliefs will reflect in some way shape or form, your beliefs.
I also find another comment in the article interesting: “She told The Associated Press via Facebook message that she would be available for an interview, but has not responded to subsequent requests.” (guess they didn’t offer her enough money for an interview yet).
As for the blogger who helped, either he is a dupe, a homophobe or just looking for 15 minutes of fame. Don’t know which, don’t really care, have my opinion of him and the tone of the blog should make that clear.
*Historical Note: Men did not always wear pants, pants as we currently know it are a historically recent inventions, the last couple hundred years. Before that seeing a man in a skirt (Kilt for the educated out there) was not unusual. – But you tell them that and they will probably call you a liar or say your “Pushing the gay agenda”
And one last note on this, I bet, now that I have posted this blog, if they ever read about it, I will be accused of “Pushing the gay agenda” because I disagree with them. You see, people like this believe in free speech, as long as that free speech agrees with them, but if you don’t then you are obviously trying to help the other side, or are stupid, criminal, whatever. You are not allowed to disagree, see, the limited mind cannot handle that, there is only right and wrong, and they are obviously right and if you disagree, you are obviously wrong.
Don’t be a sheep, Think, before you speak, before you act, and especially before you vote. Don’t make decisions based on pretty words or how someone looks. Find out the truth and act accordingly. Because even if the truth for you is different than the truth for me (and yes, that is possible), at least your decision will be informed.
Spread the word, make your speech, actions and decisions informed.
Have a wonderful day.
"God created two kinds of people, those that are Irish, and those that want to be."
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Current State of Political Affairs--Health Care:
Where to begin, the current party in charge had forced universal health care down our throats. What will this mean to everyone? Some people (the rabid followers of the current King and his jesters) would have you believe that this will lead to a Utopian society as far as health care is concerned, with everyone getting all the health care that they need.. Now let us journey back to a place I like to call reality. What will most likely happen will be something quite different.
First of all, let’s start with some of the problems with this plan. This plan covers everyone. On the surface that is good, but some of the problems I see are the abuses. Now the coverage for people who can’t afford health care but are working, that’s great, these are hard working people who need help. And for the people who can’t work for some reason and can’t afford coverage, again great. My problem comes from the people who chose to abuse the welfare systems. And don’t even try to tell me they don’t exist, I saw enough of them when I was out of work and on welfare programs like health care and food stamps. Yes, I said health care, Illinois has had health care for welfare recipients for years. I saw these women who continued to have babies so they could get more money from the system without having to work. They came in all races so don’t even think of calling me a racist. If you want the truth, the majority of the ones in the Belleville we white and from places with names like Freeburg, Smithton, etc. They were the ones I likes to call the “Trailer Park Diva’s”. My question is this, why should they have health care coverage if they don’t even want to try to get any kind of work. Right now, they know all they have to do is keep having babies and the government will support they, and now we are providing free health care. Don’t tell me this doesn’t happen, I see it all the time. If they want health care, get a job, even if it’s slinging burgers. Then I say they government should provide health care, because at least they are then trying to earn an honest living. Otherwise they should be SOL. (If you don’t know the acronym, ask someone with a brain.) The other group of people that will have coverage are the people working in this country illegally. Now why the heck are we providing them with health care, or any rights for that matter. People, illegal aliens are criminals, nothing else. So ship their butts out of here. Now I am not talking aliens/immigrants in general, I am talking about the ones that are sneaking across the border, not paying taxes, sending the money out of the country to relatives in other countries. The ones who don’t want to become American citizens. You want benefits and rights in this country, come in legally, start working to be a citizen, learn the language. Otherwise, as far as I am concerned, to bad if you get sick, should have played by the rules like the rest of us. That is problem one.
Which leads us to problem two. All these extra people that we shouldn’t be covering are going to cause taxes to go up, how else are they going to pay for it. Either taxes go up or it gets passed on to businesses, which raises costs, then the cost of products go up. Either way we are screwed. They keep telling us that it won’t cost us more, I still haven’t figured out how the government can take care of all these people and pay the doctors, nurses, etc; pay for the medicine, pay for facilities, and not have it cost the tax payers. Anybody understand the math involved? I sure don’t.
Now let’s look at what the outcome of the “Universal Coverage” will be, and before you argue that I am not dealing with reality, let’s put this in perspective. Several countries around the world have some form or other of universal health care and the results have always been the same, so this is our future whether you want to believe it or not. First thing that will happen is the cost of private medical insurance will slowly climb so that within 5-10 years the upper and middle middle-class will be on the government health insurance. That doesn’t sound to bad now does it. Except…..the government health insurance will be very basic, so forget a lot of the specialized tests and screenings that could save your life before the cancer spreads, or your son//daughter loses their hearing, etc. And the therapist your ADHD son see’s for his emotional problems, that is now probably going to be a intern who has no clue what they are doing. (REMINDER: This has happened in other countries and if you don’t think it will happen here. YOU ARE DREAMING) Oh, and that doctor that you have been seeing for years who knows your family history, forget about him, if your are on the government plan, clinic for you. And the clinic doctors, well let’s just put it this way. Someone had to graduate at the bottom of the class, the good docs are in practices that only take private insurance so that they can make money. That is our future. Just like Britain and Canada.
Prime example: Last month in Britain, a woman had been claiming stomach pains and cramps and went to the emergency room where the doctors told her she needed surgery to remove a tumor. And they did, about an 8lb girl tumor. The kicker was that she had been going to the doctor for symptoms of pregnancy for about 6 months and the doctors told her she wasn’t, after repeated tests. The hospital’s response was that they had made a mistake. Hmmm, guess the mistake was no big deal since no one died.
Another example, one that I witnessed personally, while on TDY a friend of mine broke his foot, we went to a British hospital (it was closer than a military facility) and they set and cast the foot. Three weeks later back in the states, a doctor removes the cast, treats the infection he got because of a poorly treated broken foot, then x-rayed the foot. Where they discovered it had been incorrectly set. So now they had to re-break the foot and reset the foot. And the second time the healing took a lot longer (10 weeks in the cast).
This is what we have to look forward to.
Now people keep saying things about how everyone has the right to medical coverage. Where does it say that? I know that the only rights we were guaranteed were life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But let’s look at that, Robert A. Heinlein, yes the science fiction writer but before that the military man who served his country, was a brilliant man. In one of his science fiction novels, Starship Troopers, a character of his discusses these “inalienable rights”. Below is the excerpt from the book:
"Ah, yes, the 'unalienable rights.' Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? As to liberty, the heroes who signed the great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost. The third 'right'?—the 'pursuit of happiness'? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives—but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it."
Lt. Col. Jean V. Dubois (Ret.) – Starship Troopers
These are the only rights guaranteed in the constitution. The only other rights that are guaranteed are in the “Bill of Rights”. And nowhere is health insurance guaranteed.
In all of the amendments to the constitution, never has health insurance been brought up. Why, because that is not the kind of issue the amendments deal with. Liberty, Justice and government control. Those are the issues that it is meant to deal with.
This is just another way the government is slowly but surely creating dependency on the government for everything. Eventually there will be only two classes, the rich who managed to hang on to their money and there freedoms from the government, and the rest of us who have become dependent on the government for everything. Hmmm, sound familiar. Think about it, it will eventually come to you. The current party in control wants you dependent on the government. Independent thinkers are dangerous to them. They can’t be controlled.
SO WAKE UP AMERICA AND BE AWARE. Watch your rights and guard them, or they will be gone before you know it.
First of all, let’s start with some of the problems with this plan. This plan covers everyone. On the surface that is good, but some of the problems I see are the abuses. Now the coverage for people who can’t afford health care but are working, that’s great, these are hard working people who need help. And for the people who can’t work for some reason and can’t afford coverage, again great. My problem comes from the people who chose to abuse the welfare systems. And don’t even try to tell me they don’t exist, I saw enough of them when I was out of work and on welfare programs like health care and food stamps. Yes, I said health care, Illinois has had health care for welfare recipients for years. I saw these women who continued to have babies so they could get more money from the system without having to work. They came in all races so don’t even think of calling me a racist. If you want the truth, the majority of the ones in the Belleville we white and from places with names like Freeburg, Smithton, etc. They were the ones I likes to call the “Trailer Park Diva’s”. My question is this, why should they have health care coverage if they don’t even want to try to get any kind of work. Right now, they know all they have to do is keep having babies and the government will support they, and now we are providing free health care. Don’t tell me this doesn’t happen, I see it all the time. If they want health care, get a job, even if it’s slinging burgers. Then I say they government should provide health care, because at least they are then trying to earn an honest living. Otherwise they should be SOL. (If you don’t know the acronym, ask someone with a brain.) The other group of people that will have coverage are the people working in this country illegally. Now why the heck are we providing them with health care, or any rights for that matter. People, illegal aliens are criminals, nothing else. So ship their butts out of here. Now I am not talking aliens/immigrants in general, I am talking about the ones that are sneaking across the border, not paying taxes, sending the money out of the country to relatives in other countries. The ones who don’t want to become American citizens. You want benefits and rights in this country, come in legally, start working to be a citizen, learn the language. Otherwise, as far as I am concerned, to bad if you get sick, should have played by the rules like the rest of us. That is problem one.
Which leads us to problem two. All these extra people that we shouldn’t be covering are going to cause taxes to go up, how else are they going to pay for it. Either taxes go up or it gets passed on to businesses, which raises costs, then the cost of products go up. Either way we are screwed. They keep telling us that it won’t cost us more, I still haven’t figured out how the government can take care of all these people and pay the doctors, nurses, etc; pay for the medicine, pay for facilities, and not have it cost the tax payers. Anybody understand the math involved? I sure don’t.
Now let’s look at what the outcome of the “Universal Coverage” will be, and before you argue that I am not dealing with reality, let’s put this in perspective. Several countries around the world have some form or other of universal health care and the results have always been the same, so this is our future whether you want to believe it or not. First thing that will happen is the cost of private medical insurance will slowly climb so that within 5-10 years the upper and middle middle-class will be on the government health insurance. That doesn’t sound to bad now does it. Except…..the government health insurance will be very basic, so forget a lot of the specialized tests and screenings that could save your life before the cancer spreads, or your son//daughter loses their hearing, etc. And the therapist your ADHD son see’s for his emotional problems, that is now probably going to be a intern who has no clue what they are doing. (REMINDER: This has happened in other countries and if you don’t think it will happen here. YOU ARE DREAMING) Oh, and that doctor that you have been seeing for years who knows your family history, forget about him, if your are on the government plan, clinic for you. And the clinic doctors, well let’s just put it this way. Someone had to graduate at the bottom of the class, the good docs are in practices that only take private insurance so that they can make money. That is our future. Just like Britain and Canada.
Prime example: Last month in Britain, a woman had been claiming stomach pains and cramps and went to the emergency room where the doctors told her she needed surgery to remove a tumor. And they did, about an 8lb girl tumor. The kicker was that she had been going to the doctor for symptoms of pregnancy for about 6 months and the doctors told her she wasn’t, after repeated tests. The hospital’s response was that they had made a mistake. Hmmm, guess the mistake was no big deal since no one died.
Another example, one that I witnessed personally, while on TDY a friend of mine broke his foot, we went to a British hospital (it was closer than a military facility) and they set and cast the foot. Three weeks later back in the states, a doctor removes the cast, treats the infection he got because of a poorly treated broken foot, then x-rayed the foot. Where they discovered it had been incorrectly set. So now they had to re-break the foot and reset the foot. And the second time the healing took a lot longer (10 weeks in the cast).
This is what we have to look forward to.
Now people keep saying things about how everyone has the right to medical coverage. Where does it say that? I know that the only rights we were guaranteed were life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But let’s look at that, Robert A. Heinlein, yes the science fiction writer but before that the military man who served his country, was a brilliant man. In one of his science fiction novels, Starship Troopers, a character of his discusses these “inalienable rights”. Below is the excerpt from the book:
"Ah, yes, the 'unalienable rights.' Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? As to liberty, the heroes who signed the great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost. The third 'right'?—the 'pursuit of happiness'? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives—but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it."
Lt. Col. Jean V. Dubois (Ret.) – Starship Troopers
These are the only rights guaranteed in the constitution. The only other rights that are guaranteed are in the “Bill of Rights”. And nowhere is health insurance guaranteed.
In all of the amendments to the constitution, never has health insurance been brought up. Why, because that is not the kind of issue the amendments deal with. Liberty, Justice and government control. Those are the issues that it is meant to deal with.
This is just another way the government is slowly but surely creating dependency on the government for everything. Eventually there will be only two classes, the rich who managed to hang on to their money and there freedoms from the government, and the rest of us who have become dependent on the government for everything. Hmmm, sound familiar. Think about it, it will eventually come to you. The current party in control wants you dependent on the government. Independent thinkers are dangerous to them. They can’t be controlled.
SO WAKE UP AMERICA AND BE AWARE. Watch your rights and guard them, or they will be gone before you know it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)