You do know about Bauchman don’t you? This was one of the first things I pulled up.:

Just last week Bachmann spoke on the House floor about the dangers of hate-crimes legislation. Protecting victims of homophobic crime, she explains, means protecting pedophiles:

[P]eople who are practicing pedophiles would be considered protected under this legislation, but not, I understand, veterans, not, I understand, pregnant women, not, I understand, 85-year-old grandmothers would be protected under this law. But who would be protected? A pedophile, someone who considers themselves gay, someone who considers themselves transgender, someone who considers themselves a cross-dresser? That is who is protected.

It wasn’t the first time Bachmann equated gays with child molesters. In 2004, she told a talk-radio host that same-sex marriage is dangerous because “it is our children who are the prize for this community, they are specifically targeting our children.”

They don’t run it. They are funded with our tax dollars to provide defense. But beyond approving general requests, that is about it. Comparing the US Military to US Health Care is absolutely hideous when you see what has happened to Social Security and Medicare and comparing Fed Ex to USPS. Moreover; the military is needed to defend our freedoms.

“So, we have a right to be protected from criminals from our government, they figuratively stand between us and a killer’s bullet, but we don’t have the right to be protected against disease by the same government? We’re not good enough for them to stand between us and cancer?”

That wasn’t my point. I said we all have a right to be protected from criminals but our responsibility is to not become criminals.

We all have the right to be healthy, but our responsibility is to do what we can to promote that.

The point is, our “rights” are always countered with a “responsibility.” Which is why liberals hate freedom because as the quote at the top of this page reads, it “incurs personal responsibility, that is why so many men fear it.”

It is virtually impossible gor the government to stand between us and a bullet, which is why it gives us rights to have guns ourselves. It is also impossible for them to stand between us and cancer.

Also, the American Cancer Society has been around for a long time funded through private donations (although they too have moved over to the lobbyist sector). Cancer is what it is. It’s horrible. That is why people should be allowed to buy health insurance solely for catastrophies. Something the conservatives tried tackling but it simply wasn’t socialist enough for the lefties.

“But here we have an issue where Christ Himself commanded that we care for the sick, and these people who will eagerly wait to be first in line to tell you how homosexuality is an abomination to God are the same ones who see fit to protect the profits of insurance companies over actual human beings.”

First, that is why Christ’s influence on this country has led to a world where nobody has ever been turned down in an emergency room. It is why we all instinctually help others. It is not a case for handing commerce over to big government and allowing them to micromanage every aspect of our lives from our pocketbooks to our choice on whether or not to lie in a tanning bed without being slapped a 10% excise tax (or did you not hear about that yet?).

The only ones who say homosexuality is an abomination are those who aren’t true Christians — since the New Testment stomps that out after Christ paid our debt for us. Some stupid people may say it and profess to be Christians to have some imaginary framework to say such things, but by now we all know how effective those folks are to anything.

“None, and he’s a better person for it. He took his education and all the knowledge that came with it and decided to become a public servant”

That’s not how it works. You don’t take an education and decide to say: “well, it’s time to rule the world now!” You get out there, you get experience to see what it’s like to be one of the people. You segue into public service by knowing what it is like, not by simply getting an education.

“What did Bachamnn give back to?”

Bachmann was a business owner and was successful at it. Once her public service is over, she’ll be able to return to it. She’s an amazing watchdog for liberty and freedom and her talent for picking bills apart and informing others who are responsible for providing an economy to debate about in the first place (real Americans who own businesses and provide jobs) has made her someone that the left understandably hates.

“you might want to approve my other comment.”

I haven’t seen one. I will double-check.

A person can use personal responsibility to prevent cancer but a person can prepare for that disaster by saving money in case it happens.

As for congential defects, let private charity help those people. We are generous here. People will donate and do. The last thing we need is Uncle Sam getting into the charity business.

Really? Go ahead and tell us what the G in G.I. stands for, genius…

“We have the right to be protected from criminals because we also bear the responsibility of not becoming criminals ourselves.”

So, we have a right to be protected from criminals from our government, they figuratively stand between us and a killer’s bullet, but we don’t have the right to be protected against disease by the same government? We’re not good enough for them to stand between us and cancer?

Here’s something I never understood. Conservative christians pretend to espouse values, and even preface their campaigns on them. But here we have an issue where Christ Himself commanded that we care for the sick, and these people who will eagerly wait to be first in line to tell you how homosexuality is an abomination to God are the same ones who see fit to protect the profits of insurance companies over actual human beings. It’s astonishing that they can be looked at by some saps and be seen as moral creatures.

“Before passing out entitlements or creating entire government-funded budgets per industry, we need to return to the simple rules of self-responsibility.”

That’s all well and fine Steve, but the bottom line is people can’t prevent cancer by having personal responsibility. They can’t avoid congenital diseases by being personally responsible. All you’re doing is passing the buck, and you get away with it by dressing it up with faux accountability.

“What private industry was Obama involved in?”

None, and he’s a better person for it. He took his education and all the knowledge that came with it and decided to become a public servant, forgoing profits over people and gave back to the community that gave so much to him. What did Bachamnn give back to? Herself. Although babysitting Gretchen Carlson has really prepared her for life in the Senate…

P.S. you might want to approve my other comment. It’s been sitting there for two days

Now, I’m not expecting to live any longer than 60, but better to have some plan than none at all.

John, your idea makes too much sense. That’s why it’ll never be put into action. States like New Jersey and California have such exorbitant health insurance premiums because they regulate the health insurance companies to death. Iowa, for example, doesn’t, and it literally costs one-third the price for heath insurance there than in Hackensack.

In my opinion, lawsuits are not the number one problem with the healthcare system.

The number one problem is health insurance doesn’t function as insurance.

As I have posted here before, if my car needs gasoline, then I don’t submit a claim to my auto insurance policy. But, if my car is destroyed in an accident or by some act of God, then I will. Auto insurance is designed to cover such things.

Health insurance doesn’t work that way. Instead of being designed to cover personal health disasters, people and the government demand it covers much more than a massive heart attack or stroke. These same people whine about how much health insurance costs and demand it covers even more medical conditions.

Geez, did you not read what Mel just wrote? Yes, it was fine for a while…but now that the life expectancy has increased, more people are actually taking out more than they put in throughout their prime.

What do lawyers call it when more goes out than comes in?

I call that insolvent. So now what? The middle-class tax hike that Obama keeps backing away from? Or do we allow people to keep more of what they earn from this point on and allow them the benefit of planning for their own retirement.

I frankly would love to put that 7.65% deducted from m paycheck into my private IRA. All employers can take the 7.65% they have to match for social security and give it to their employees as a raise.

Why not?

The few who cannot handle it will have to turn to social services. But we cannot have enriched social services based on the needs of others without the private wealth to fund it.

The post office was to give you the different of quality between one industry when part is controlled by government and the other is controlled by the private sector.

Clearly, the private sector does a much better job.

Take care, Mike.

Steve throws in Post office out of the Blue.

You guys are really something. Take care.

Holy crimoney…that’s just about the funniest thing I’ve heard in a long time. If they’ve worked so well, why are the funds for these two programs nearly gone? Social Security was set up during a time when the average life expectancy of most Americans was at around 55 years–below the beginning age for most who would receive Social Security. Now that the average life expectancy is around 85, damn near everyone gets it, and each person on Social Security in their retirement years exhausts what they put into the fund within two years.

And Medicare? There are some doctors now being forced to stop accepting Medicare because the program “works so well.” One here in Phoenix, a Mayo clinic-linked office, was in the news for having to stop accepting Medicare, and quite a few of his patients were very upset. He laid out the reasons simply and clearly: the program doesn’t pay in full and rarely pays on time. If this doctor wishes to remain in business, he needs to cut something from his expenditures.

Robert, again you start with the “cons don’t want justice” crap. I hate to tell you this, but there is always–ALWAYS–a risk of something not going the way we’d like during a surgery. That does not automatically make it the surgeon’s fault. When are you or the blood-sucking lawyer going to realize that?

Every human body is pretty much made the same, but many things are very different. Like fingerprints differing on each person, placement of nerves and other things differ greatly from person to person. A surgery that wouldn’t drastically alter my life may do so for another much older person for a lot of different reasons. This is why doctors are required to explain the inherent risks of a procedure and have you sign documentation that you understand those risks prior to treatment.

Your mindset of victimhood is what has screwed this country up.