Is Hillary Paying Her Health Insurance?

She is stiffing caterers, lighting companies, and all kinds of companies.  Are the health insurance bills for all her campaign workers being paid?  Inquiring minds what to know.  Especially since she is threatening to throw people in jail if they don’t buy health insurance from HER.

flaming_skull.gif

Of course, her health care is paid for by taxpayers.  If anything were to happen Walter Reed would open its loving arms and give her anything she wanted.  I wonder if her campaign staff would be forced to go to emergency rooms to wait?

Or maybe she’s just waiting to make this happen:

In an extensive interview on health policy on Wednesday, Clinton, a Democrat from New York, said she would like to cap health insurance premiums at 5 percent to 10 percent of income.

It would then be the responsibility of all her employees to fend for themselves, right Senator?

Quote of the Day- 23 Feb

From the wonderful House of Eratosthenes:

People want, as the Obamamaniacs tell us, “change.” I say, go for it. Fight terrorism with a universal healthcare plan. Go ahead and make it prohibitively and artificially expensive to hire new people to a business or, God forbid, start a new business. Give ALL the money and power to our trial lawyers. Take all our guns away and punish violent crime with a finger-waggling and wrist-slapping or two, if you punish it at all. Pay criminals money to not misbehave. Negotiate with tyrants around the world — no exceptions. Let me know how that works out.

I encourage you to read the whole article – a very well thought-out defense of conservatism in a time of McCain.  Does America need to be shown just how illogical, impractical, and self-defeating liberalism is every generation?

Do we need to just shut up and do what the Republican Party elders tell us to – regardless of whether it is good for the country or not?  Just because Obambi and the Hildebeast would be so much worse?

Its going to be an interesting 2008.

Sterilize Teenage Girls

Here’s an interesting proposition mooted from the UK:

Last week, an intriguing proposition was mooted by Government minister Dawn Primarolo.

Teenage girls, she said, could be steered towards what is described as “long-term contraception”.

This is now possible thanks to the development of contraceptive jabs and implants which can last up to five years.

In other words, there is a way of effectively sterilising girls for a lengthy period of time.

At what age? Well, doesn’t 12 until 17 sound rather sensible?

Its the underlying assumption that I find most despicable. Do you own your body? Or does the government? After all, the UK government “gives” you absolutely 100% free health care. (Just don’t look too closely at what you actually get). So if the government is responsible for your health care, does that mean it should be able to control your actions and bodily functions?

This is just an extension of the thought process that treatment for smokers and fat people and sick old people costs too much and should be curtailed. Why not keep these young sluts from having babies? Just look at the positive outcomes:

  • fewer abortions – theoretically
  • no welfare payments for those illegitimate rug rats
  • lots of time for these teenagers to practice sex without getting pregnant so they will be experienced, available, and willing
  • less maternity health costs paid for by the all-knowing and kind government

While this might be considered some sort of hypothetical trial balloon to demonstrate absurdity – do you really think that there aren’t some government planners who are actually planning for this action? Of course, no one would actually try and implement mass sterilization, would they?

But remember that doctors organizations and government bureaucrats now consider it safe to say that some people should not be treated because of the choices they have made in their life.  20 years ago, would the average citizen believe that this would be considered mainstream thought?  Its funny that all the liberal hysteria about loss of freedoms completely misses the fact that the biggest loss will be coming as the “gift” of government.

Remember that this free Obambi-care or Hillarycare will change the basic standing between government and citizens. Once you give responsibility for your health care to government, government will own you and your actions.

Tax Me More – Not Really

And those who believe in “government investments” show just how much they actually put their money where their mouth is:

State lawmakers can rule out Virginian’s offering up more of their hard-earned money to fix the $1.4 billion budget shortfall Gov. Tim Kaine announced this week.

At least that is what a peek at the so-called “Tax Me More Fund” suggests.

Since its inception in 2002, the fund has collected a total of $10,217.04. 

In his book, “From Hope to Higher Ground,” Mr. Huckabee said that from 2001 to 2005, a total of 56 persons made contributions to the Arkansas fund, totaling $2,077. 

Don’t tax me or thee, but tax him over there behind that tree.

“The people of Virginia have voluntarily taxed themselves in the amount of 0.00000005 percent of Virginia’s budget since 2002, which is a good measure of their support for tax increases,” said Sen. Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, Fairfax County Republican. 

So why do we let Presidential candidates run around talking about how  wonderful it will be when everybody is taxed to death for “universal health care”?  Because everybody believes that it will be somebody else paying for it – not them!

Healthy People Cost More

So should governments encourage people to eat twinkies and smoke?

Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it doesn’t save money, researchers reported Monday.

It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.

”It was a small surprise,” said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the Netherlands’ National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, who led the study. ”But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more.”

And this really brings into sharp relief an interesting point about turning the responsibility over health care to a government.  While the initial jabber about universal healthcare is how wonderful it will be that no one has to worry about getting sick because the all-knowing Big Brother will take care of everyone – once you screw up the system and get government running  it, the focus becomes COST!  As in – holy crap this free health care costs tons of money.  And if we only have 25% of the population carrying everybody else, the productive ones will finally balk.

So it becomes a cost-benefit analysis – as in just how much cost can we shave off these silly people who are going to die anyway in order to keep the productive ones happy.  And government bureaucrats are really good at a) screwing over people who aren’t government bureaucrats and b) responding to political pressure.  So whoever screams the loudest gets the health care and the peasants are sent off to watch TV and die quietly in the corner.

Which this interesting little snippet in the story illustrates:

”This throws a bucket of cold water onto the idea that obesity is going to cost trillions of dollars,” said Patrick Basham, a professor of health politics at Johns Hopkins University who was unconnected to the study. He said that government projections about obesity costs are frequently based on guesswork, political agendas, and changing science.