2009-9-15 03:15:00
JJ:
I do not understand why these writers are upset about Hoffman wanting the names and salaries of public servants made public. In his article he rightfully says:
"The government knows who I am. Why can't we know who comprises the government? And if we can't know, one has to ask, are we the masters of the government or its servant?"
Since we taxpayers are paying the wages of government workers then we have the right to know who they are and their salaries. Sounds reasonable to me.
And comparing being on such a list to Nazi Germany makes no sense. It was the government to fear there not citizens trying to hold Hitler accountable. The government already knows all the details of it's own employees and they would be the safest in a dictatorship. The Town Hall protesters and Tea Party people are the ones that would be rounded up.
"Crime Prof" writes:
"The intelligentsia are the first to be rounded up in any sort of central government take over. That leaves out most of the "tea baggers" [...] Way to go Barney Frank!"
JJ:
Yeah, way to go Barney. Ignore the will of the people. The majority do not want Obama's health care plan.
The intelligentsia are not always the first to be rounded up and sometimes not even rounded up at all, but dissidents are always threatened with their lives or imprisonment.
Mao and North Vietnam persecuted or killed intellectuals, but many intellectuals were movers and shakers in the Bolshevik Revolution. Hitler cultivated many intelligent Germans who helped him with technology that challenged the world. An example was Werner Von Braun who developed his V2 rockets and later joined our team and built the Saturn Rocket that sent us to the moon.
Castro treated intellectuals well after the revolution as long as they cooperated but dissidents of all sorts were imprisoned along with gays.
"Sequencer" wrote:
"But this administration is not engaging in these tactics so I am not sure the purpose of this conversation."
JJ:
Mr. Dessert started the ball rolling in his letter insinuating that Hoffman's list could be used to round up citizens in a hostile takeover.
That's fallacious because the government already knows who it employs and lots of details about them.
Hoffman asserts that since we the citizens employ government workers and pay their wages then those who we employ and how much we pay them should be public knowledge.
I agree.
On the other hand, we have no right to know such details on those who we do not employ or pay the wages thereof.
"Joe's Revenge" wrote:
"Why was this comment (my post) hidden? Some of you people seriously need to grow up."
JJ:
You should have been here yesterday. Most of my posts were flagged and one was deleted.
I was told once that posts which are hidden are those that are flagged for abuse so I flagged a couple inflammatory Lefty ones and nothing happened. They were not hidden. It looks like only the people of the Right are hidden or deleted.
And the Left has the gall to accuse the Right of censorship.
"Grandjester" wrote:
"And, again, Joseph plays the 'victim' card. Does it not occur to you Joseph that maybe, just maybe, it's not us, it's you?"
JJ:
You do not have the power to make me a victim though you try with your incessant insults.
"Grandjester":
"And, of course, 'free speech' advocates Joseph and Joe are flagging my posts again. Poor babies, love to dish it, can't take it."
JJ:
Now who's the victim? It's you complaining about something I am not even doing.
Did we forget our bran muffin this morning?
"Grandjester" (GJ):
"Again, does it even occur to you that you may be the problem here? No, of course not, why do I even ask when I know you haven't a shred of self awareness in you."
JJ:
Yeah, I am a problem to the Left here, just like light is a problem for those hiding in the dark of night.
GJ:
"And you confessed to flagging posts in yesterdays' Letters section for no good reason, why should I think today is any different?"
JJ:
I flagged two posts that deserved it about three months ago, but nothing happened. I have flagged nothing since. So it's you that's playing the victim complaining about me.
JJ:
Question:
Wayne Hoffman received a lot of criticism for stating that the names and wages of public employees should be made public. Do you critics really think the public has no right to know who they employ and how much we are paying them?
If you believe we have no right to know can you explain why you believe this?
(No answer was received.)
JJ:
Good luck in trying to get all for U.S. citizens the same health care as Congress. Such is virtually impossible because we have neither the resources or the money. They have the best possible private insurance that I am sure they will hypocritically maintain even if Universal Health Care is shoved upon the rest of us.
I'll tell you what they could do right now that we cannot only afford, but would save a lot of money. Place all members of Congress on the same Medicare plan that is offered to our senior citizens. If they want something better than this they can buy it out of their own pockets.
If we put them on a current public health care plan then they could get a taste of the government programs at work as they have created them. That would be great karma.
Also if they sent their kids to public schools, instead of private, maybe they would suddenly start coming up with good ideas to improve education.
"Gimmeshelter" wrote:
"PS... Joe: Money IS a resource."
JJ:
What money? The little left that the Chinese will lend us?
JJ:
Why in the world would anyone in their right mind think that Republicans would vote to eliminate Medicare when the majority of them in the house voted FOR Medicare when it originated in 1965 and the Republican president George Bush expanded it with "Part D," the prescription drug program?
Medicare spends over $9000 per enrollee a year compared to a little over $2000 for Japan's socialized medicine. With over $60 billion in fraud and more than that wasted in unnecessary testing the program is a massive failure that needs to be completely torn down and then rebuilt on sound financial principles -- at least as good as Europe does.
If we do not fix it but just expand it then we will either go bankrupt of have to ration medical services.
Remember the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over expecting different results.
Quoting JJ, "Grandjester" wrote:
"'Teabagger' is a gay slur that has nothing to do with Tea Party people."
"Grandjester" then continued with:
"Yeah Joseph, again with the not paying attention thing, it was your tea party buds and Fox news that coined the term, not know what that meant as slang (not a slur). So sorry, they owned it long before I repeated it."
JJ:
It is you that does not pay attention.
It was Anderson Cooper on CNN that first used the term "teabagger" disparagingly and immediately afterwards many thought he must be a closet gay to be so familiar with a gay phrase not widely known.
I have never heard anyone employed by Fox News use this term except in reference to Anderson Cooper statement.
JJ:
Mr Rathbone certainly expresses a desire of mine. Wouldn't it be great if those who want a forced socialized utopia just paid their own way and used their system and let the rest of us just stand back and watch?
As it is, the Left are like the Egyptians in the days of Moses who did not want the productive slaves to leave at any cost. They wanted to keep the producers so they could pay for their utopia on the backs of the hard workers while they got paid for bureaucratic jobs.
If we moved all the Far Left to their own island to fend for themselves they would be eating their young within a coupled years. They'd soon have their own little North Korea to enjoy for themselves.
On the other hand, the Tea Party people are like the strong individualists who built this country and made it the richest in the world.
JJ:
To those against tort reform, saying it will not decrease the cost of health care answer me this:
Medical malpractice insurance can cost a physician up to $200,000 a year with many paying around $55,000.
$55,000 is more than some doctors in Europe make for the entire year.
Are you telling me that if we had a tort reform that reduced premiums to less than $1000 a year, as they pay in Japan, that would not reduce health care costs?
In 2004 there were 918,00 physicians. Lower malpractice premiums could save many billions that could be passed on to consumers.
Can someone explain to me why saving many billions a year would not make a difference?
And don't tell me the problem is the insurance companies are gouging us. There is no evidence of that is the problem.
Copyright © 2009 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved