|Reviews for Sick Politics|
| J112011 11/27/11 . chapter 1
Hm... We're on the opposite sides of the issue on this, I'm afraid. My COBRA is about to run out and I cannot afford to purchase private one. I wish you wrote more what's so wrong about state-provided health insurance. I don't get it.
| sophiesix 4/16/10 . chapter 1
well i don't know much about the details here but i love the concept of the people owning the law, and teh owners manual to instruct politicians waht to do: I think politicians forget they work for us sometimes. don't know if you've seen the film 'the castle', but they argue that there (less eloquently, of course), that restricting a family's freedom to live in their home was against the 'vibe' of the constitution :D Funnily enough, the judge wasnt impressed :(
| wo bu ai ni le 4/13/10 . chapter 1
Hm.. I think it's assumed (and with reason) that the people of China, the UK and pretty much every other country belong to the American government as well.
Yes you can!
| nickyO 4/11/10 . chapter 1
I completely agree with the idea that the Constitution belongs to us. And I thank you for raising questions about politics because it seems as if debating the facts is what is missing in our newscasts. I would probably make you fairly angry because I tend to stay as far away from the news as possible, and I know that I'm not as educated on the issues as I should be.
| Robert Orville Berkshire 4/5/10 . chapter 1
Shame on you! You admit right off the bat that you want nothing more than to indoctrinate the young and express a complete lack of understanding of what "socialism" and "fascism" are.
First, it should be understand that socialism is not inherently a bad thing. When taken too far, or applied to a system that can't handle it, yes, socialism can and will cause problems. HOWEVER, the same can be said for capitalism, and happens time and time again. America has a mixed-market system, using social services like the FDA and the US military to protect and serve the citizens (which is the opposite of fascism, as I will explain). America still doesn't have universal health care, and the bill was meant to reduce costs and increase availability of health care around the board. The Youtuber "LiberalViewer" stated this quite well in a recent video, in which he expressed a division between natural rights, which are labeled in the Constitution and the American Bill of Rights, and promised rights. The natural rights are there to restrict power of the government, and are always there. Promised rights, as you said in your letter, are given by the politicians, and exist in such forms as education and HEALTH CARE. However, because they require the government exerting power, they are not an eternal guarantee to citizens. I suppose a more accurate term would be "privilege".
Health care, like education and a well-run military, are essential to the populace because they allow it to grow and flourish. It shouldn't take much thought to figure out that it is bad for a nation to lose hard-working citizens to pre-existing conditions, a sad state of affairs that the bill is changing.
Second, you mention fascism. Fascism is the support of the good of the state, and not of the people. At what point does "not fucking over citizens" become "giving health care to the bloated politicians that already have it"? Yes, a byproduct of a healthy citizenry is a healthy workforce, government and military, but would you rather have thousands die needlessly every year because you're afraid of a "fascism" you don't understand? it's a point that has been beaten to death in the political sphere, but I feel the need to remind you that Europe and Canada have good healthcare systems that are just as "socialist" and "fascist" as you fear.
But I'll admit that we're on different sides of the force. I don't know what you're afraid of in the bill. Could you please be more explicit, instead of relying on such outdated scare tactics as "socialism" and "fascism"? What consequences do you fear from this bill?
| SirScott 4/2/10 . chapter 1
To a certain extent any government owns its citzens, no matter how it's twisted. But, of course, the health care law takes government ownership to whole new levels.
Marxism only sounds good in a quick sound bite. Basically, it says that everybody puts everything in a collective pot and everybody owns that pot. Of course, the common worker is evolved enough to determine his or her needs, so a group of "supermen" will determine the needs of the worker, until he or she is evolved enough to determine their needs and draw from the collective pot without the aid of the "supermen", but the catch is the worker cannot evolve under socialism, because they have to continue to work, so the "supermen" will have to control the people's pot forever.
Is the current health care law that? No, but it is designed to destroy our current health care system, which will give the government a chance to place a the old system with a new Marxist system.
This health care law requires everyone to buy health insurance and requires the health insurance companies to cover everyone no maters what and to have no caps on what the health insurances have to pay out. There is no way the health insurance companies can survive that. So when they crash and burn the government will step in and control things completely.
The real problem with health care costs is the bad economy. America has over-regulated itself until it manufactures almost nothing. We are no longer self supporting, so our problems won't go away. America must become self supporting again or we will fall. That's the real problem and one, by the way, that neither Democrats or Republicans have a solution for.
Well, anyway, it is good to see someone paying attention to current events. My opinion is a good strong economy, and not a law designed to push us towards Marxism,that makes America self supporting again is the solution to our current troubles.
| tiger002 4/1/10 . chapter 1
Good point here, although it might just be that I agree with you. It seems the government forgets that their job is the help the people, not rule over them.
| Eternal Skies 4/1/10 . chapter 1
I don't know much about U.S politics but from what I read in the internet about it, Obama isn't doing the U.S no good.
I hope they can publish your answer, at least show what the readers' think
| East-0f-Eden 3/31/10 . chapter 1
Very interesting, I wish I could see the editorial you are responding to. But, I do wonder (and worry) how this whole healthcare thing is going to turn out.
| Brenda Agaro 3/31/10 . chapter 1
You definitely hit the nail there. I hope your local newspaper publishes this (or have already.) I'm not one into politics, but this was thought provoking.
| Mirabella 3/31/10 . chapter 1
I must admit that i dont really follow American politics, but this idea of Obamas seemed to be a good one, going off what i randomly hear on the NEWS. :)
| Dante's Disciple 3/31/10 . chapter 1
I'm afraid I'm not too well up on the facts of Obama's health care, but it has been compared to our NHS, which, for all it's flaws, does grant healthcare to everyone which is surely a good thing.
I'd be interested to know what many Americans have against this idea,
It's funny, I've been critical of Obama since he was made President, but this is actually one area I think he has it right.
| moongazer7 3/31/10 . chapter 1
Interesting and true... I like it... I might write a parallel piece as most folks of my generation unnerve me when talking about government.
1. they listen to all this nonsense and believe our founding fathers built a democracy when this country is a republic.
2. they have no earthly idea how to use the first amendment. everyone is violating there rights left and right and everyone is so cruel about it.
3. they don't have any idea nor give a care on what our constitution, bill of rights, and declaration of independence says.
4. they don't have a clue what a democrat or republican are.
5. they don't even care. which makes me want to pull my hair out.
anyways, off to bed it's late here, like really late.
Talk to ya later.