Sunday, 05 July 2009
-
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...
by Lee Hemen
July 5, 2009The phrase “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is a foundational truth in the Declaration of Independence. These three aspects are listed among the “inalienable rights” of man given to them by their Creator. However, if we take a serious look at what has occurred within the past several months of the Obama administration we discover that all of these have not only been trampled on, by his reckless abandon, but have been turned into financial imprisonment for millions of Americans.
We are now bound by the shackles of a 25 year high in unemployment, huge taxation, and national indebtedness. Future generations will be enslaved by the reckless spending practices of a Democratic Congress urged on and endorsed by the President.
Both the born and the unborn have been turned into Presidential props for personal political empowerment. We have become expendable and now solely exist to support the government. Americans have been sold the Obama neo-communistic bilge that “from each according to his means, to each according to his needs.” Which, for this Administration, means that the Government’s needs outweigh your earnings.
Welcome to the wonderful world of “change,” which is all you may have left.
---
This article is copyrighted 2009 © by Lee Hemen, but you can freely use this if you quote it in its entire context.
-
recommend
- recs 1
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Post a Comment
- Back to PastorBlastor's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in PastorBlastor's local time zone: GMT -08:00 (Pacific Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (3)
That's a load of BS if I've ever heard it. The economy is the way it is because of the banking/credit system. We didn't get into this mess in the last six months alone, it started years ago. Which if I might point out was during the administration of a conservative right-wing bible beating president. But even then I'm not going to go so far as to say it's all his fault. But I'm sure spending billions of dollars on a war in Iraq that didn't need to be fought in the first place really didn't help our government spending too much.
It's easy to blame Obama since his administration started during this whole mess. The guy is spending some money to get the ball rolling and get certain companies and services back in order to try and jump start the economy again. What I find hilarious is that these right-wing crazies get their panties in a bunch about our president throwing 100 billion into American companies and financial institutes in order to restart our economy, yet they completely forget about the nearly 700 billion spent by our cowboy oilman of a previous president blowing up another country in a pointless war that had nothing to do with 9/11/01.
@roxics - Yep, and we saw it work for Japan, right? What did they call it? Oh yeah, the lost decade! Japan did not pull out of their financial mess until they did away with all their stimulus tax and spending. And when did that pesky banking mess start anyway? By golly it was right after Democratics took control of both houses of Congress and began passing legislation that demanded equality in loans for all the people no matter what their financial status. And who warned them repeatedly about this foolishness? Why it was "a conservative right-wing bible beating president" who did so four times and yet he was ignored. In fact, just the week before the banks took their dive, the President warned Congress and the House Banking Chairman, Democratic Rep. Barney "Boy Toy" Frank said, "Anyone who says the banking industry is weak is lying. We need to make more Fanny Mae funds and loans available." McCain tried to bring legislation to a vote on it and was voted down by the Senate. And lets see, while I hated it when Republican were like hogs at a trough, 700 billion is a far cry from the TRILLIONS we are now in debt because of this tax-and-spend President and this Democratic Congress.
Where are the bleeding heart liberals who screamed about the national debt under Bush? Nary a peep out of them for their throw money at the problem President. I also find it interesting that there is no military body count being done, and there have been well over a hundred and forty soldiers killed since Obamafuhrer began sending in troops. A true chicken hawk, since he never served anywhere in the military, unless you want to count his community organizing! And what is your argument? Bush? Please. Bush is not in office any more and it isn't Bush who has placed future generations under a huge tax debt. And now your Obamadoctor wants to give us all health care and expects us to believe it will be run well by the Federal Government just like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are. These, by the way, are expected to go bankrupt by 2014 according to the CBO, which figures it will take more TRILLIONS to make them solvent, yet nary a peep out of Obamaspender and his Democornies. Will we have another "stimulus"?
@roxics - By the way, the figures by the CBO suggest that it is now projected that through 2080, more than $104 trillion will be owed in unfunded liabilities to Medicare and Social Security—or $89 trillion and $15.1 trillion, respectively. And, according to Robert Romano, "The irony is that the $104 trillion price tag, horrendous as it is, may actually be small in comparison to what Americans will really be forced to pay once the new government-run health care plan is implemented.
Consider this: Under the House version of the so-called public “option,” individuals up to 400 percent of the poverty level, or making approximately $43,320 or less annually, will be eligible for some level of health coverage under the plan whether through the public “option,” Medicaid, or otherwise.
There’s a small problem. As of 2006, there were approximately 91.5 million people aged 25-65 who fell into that income bracket, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Factor in the nearly 35 million who were 65 and older at that time, and the total figure comes to over 125.8 million who will be eligible for government-administered health care.
And once the new so-called public “option” crowds out and eliminates all other private health options (as the program’s sponsors fully expect it to do according to page 16 of the bill), sooner or later the total entitlement will extend to all 125.8 million.
The cost to taxpayers? Far, far more than we can possibly bear.
Presently, the average premium for single coverage is $4,700, according to the National Coalition on Health Care. If all 125.8 million of those eligible received fully-funded 'average' health plans, the total burden to taxpayers would rise to a staggering $591.26 billion annually.
But let’s just deal with the 91.5 million aged 25-65. They alone would cost the taxpayers $430.05 billion annually. This means that if nothing else changed—the population, inflation, the average cost of premiums, etc.—by 2080, the unfunded liabilities would rise to $30.1 trillion above the Board of Trustees’ current $104 trillion estimate. But, of course, that’s a low-ball figure, since the population will rise, inflation will increase, and undoubtedly so, too, will the cost of the average premium."