2010-1-18 04:39:00
JJ:
I don't think Mr. Powell (who said that various circumstances today are like Orwell's "1984") has ever read the book "1984." His letter itself is Orwellian in that truth is reversed Big Brother style.
First, Tiger Woods would not be the focus of the news for a celebrity like that would not be allowed to compete with Big Brother's adoration.
Secondly, he says "religious nationalism is skyrocketing."
Religion was not allowed in Big Brother's world (except seeing Big government as godlike) and it is not skyrocketing but at the lowest point in over 200 years.
He says, "Shootings are standard."
There are always some crazy crimes in a free society. But they were also almost non-existent in Big Brother's world. Just like in Mao's China the people were too dehumanized to do either good or evil.
Powell continues: "Sean Hannity is shamelessly promoting Lynyrd Skynyrd's new album 'God and Guns' to his 13.25 million listeners."
It is amazing indeed that anyone would compare a song dedicated to freedom of religion and the second amendment to "1984." In Big Brother's world even most leftist readers know there are no guns for the people or freedom of religion.
Another staggering misstatement: "Walmart did $340 billion in sales."
Nothing like Walmart even exists in Big Brother's "Oceana." They barely have enough to eat and can't even buy a sharp razor blade for shaving there.
There is no religious fanaticism, no one like Sarah Palin, no email leaks exposing government corruption and no private shuttles to space in Orwell's "1984."
There is one thing that exists in Big Brother's 1984 that Powell would like: Universal Health Care, similar to what is desired by Obama. Big Brother will take care of everyone -- just not very well.
All those who see Big Government as benevolent should read "1984."
"Badnana: "Joseph, there is a hypocritical feeling that Travis Powell is trying to impart, and it feels like '1984.'"
JJ: Saying that things that are a direct opposite of "1984" makes one feel like he is in "1984" is like saying black is white, pain is pleasure and hot is cold. Remember the Ministry of Truth, which called truth error?
Have you read the book? If not, you should, for you talk as if you know nothing about it.
"Badnana: "But I see your point. It doesn't directly correlate to '1984,' like Bush's 'Clean Air Act' that actually allowed MORE pollution."
JJ: Sounds like you are getting inspiration from Big Brother's Ministry of Truth. Here are some real facts.
Bush went with free will incentives instead of Big Brother control tactics and it worked. According to Knight-Ridder (Oct 13, 2004) during the first 4 years of the Bush administration major greenhouse emissions from smokestacks were reduced 9 percent and greenhouse gasses were reduced 0.5 percent. Since then CO2 has decreased even more with his last year in office resulting in a 3% drop.
See: http://nrinstitute.org/mediamalpractice/?p=516
See chart at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/25/carbon-emissions
By contrast Canada is the Leftist darling that signed Kyoto and their CO2 emissions have increased much more than ours per capita. Bush is attacked more than the Canadian Premier because of his approach, not the results which are better than Canada's.
If you want to see Big Brother at work look to the Democrat Congress and Obama. Nothing you reference from Bush had any correlation to the "1984" story.
"CSmith": "I don't know about religion over the past 200 years but it is certainly at its highest point in the last 60, my life time...it is just that it is not all Christianity."
JJ: Well, I'm 64 and remember things a lot differently. When I was young you couldn't have a conversation with the older generation without them injecting religion or morality into it. It was too much for me and I'm generally supportive of religion.
We also had extreme censorship due to religious influence and [the magazine] "Playboy" was considered the greatest work of the devil on the planet. When I was in school religion got "Under God" placed in the Pledge of Allegiance. [The evangelist] Oral Roberts was on the mainstream networks. You look at the religious influence in the 1950's and now there is no comparison.
The difference is not in more religion, but less religion and much more outcry from atheists with an agenda.
"Badnana: "Where do you ever get the idea Bush was for clean air?"
JJ: Because emissions were reduced under his administration. Duh...
"Badnana: "What dogma are you referring to that we 'lefties'...""
JJ: This dogma: "Bush bad -- no matter what, even if he improved air quality. Obama good -- no matter what, even if he enslaves our children with debt."
JJ:
Looks like a repeat of points that have been made many times before so I thought I would give a different perspective.
I speak not only for myself, but there are many like me who see those placing government assistance for their health as in a very pathetic position that is entirely man made. It appears that those who are so dependent on Big Brother place government assisted health care right up there with personal freedom, food and housing.
For me such a thing is about number 100 on my list for I've never had to use any type of health insurance in my entire life of almost 65 years.
And why?
Because I've read a couple books on natural health and discovered I can take care of myself in everything except a major accident or imminent life and death situation.
The point is that it is not an accident I haven't needed health insurance. If anyone out there wants to invest about $40 in reading materials most (with a few exceptions) can do the same thing. Then they can take charge of their health and they can cease bellyaching about the system expecting others to pay for their irresponsibility.
I agree that it is a major mistake in discovery to read the Bible, form a conclusion, and then to think you have solved the science. Many in the past who have done this have been embarrassed and proven wrong as were the Vatican scientists in the days of Galileo.
Newton had the right idea. He studied the Bible more than he did math and physics and sought out the mysteries of Daniel and Revelations to his dying day. He found inspiration from the Bible, but instead of proclaiming such ideas as true science he tested them as well as his findings in alchemy and astrology. Students of Newton's more recently revealed writings feel that his great discoveries were largely due to his wide range of contemplation on many unorthodox sources that he could not even reveal for fear of persecution.
I agree with this approach for I have found many truths in unusual places. The wider the range of knowledge the more complete will be the vision as in Newton's case.
"Flyboijoey" wrote: "'Take back our country,' is a nothing phrase."
JJ: The Left used that term much more during the Bush administration than the Right is using it today.
"Flyboijoey" wrote: "The election was a landslide in favor of Obama."
JJ: Reagan had a landslide with 49 states. Obama had a fairly average win.
"Flyboijoey" wrote: "He still has pretty high approval numbers (much higher than GW at this point in his presidency)."
JJ: Bush was over 80 percent at this point. Obama is below 50 percent.
"Flyboijoey" wrote: "What would the "teabagger...er Tea Partiers" like to see happen here? Another regime of GW or the like?"
JJ: It would be better by far than what we have now.
"Flyboijoey" wrote: "What happened to those that claimed they would move to Canada if Obama was elected?"
JJ: Didn't hear that, though I heard many from the Left say that about Bush being elected -- like Alec Baldwin and Barbara Streisand. Unfortunately they didn't move.
I don't recall reading about any Mormon suicide bombers but this bunch treats them with much more disdain than fanatics who kill innocent men women and children. Strange value judgments indeed.
"Nukeworker" wrote: "$45 a month for health insurance! Sign me up!"
JJ: You're right, and that would be a great deal if taxpayers didn't have to subsidize the guy to the tune of an extra $9600 a year.
Dr. Muney of New York cut through all the government paperwork and "help" and offered unsubsidized healthcare for $79 a month, but the helpful government stepped in and told him he was breaking the law and had to increase his prices. Sigh.
Before the government tried to help us you could stay a night in a hospital room for as little as $8 a day in 1958, or about $60 in today's money.
"X15": "If government 'help' increases medical costs, wouldn't we expect to see the highest costs where there is the most government help?"
JJ: Yes. And we do. Each person insured by Medicare costs $9600 a year plus the premiums that are privately paid. Now you may think that $9600 is free money but it comes from taxpayers so it is not free. This is news to many lefties.
"X15": "If you have any intention of being intellectually honest (and, of course, you always do), you have to adjust any Medicare cost comparison to account for the age of the recipients. Older folks have higher medical costs. If you're trying to demonstrate a causal link, you have to look at different....""
JJ: Medicaid has similar costs and they insure the younger crowd. Even factoring in the age the costs is over twice what it should be. I've answered this objection before.
"Gimmeshelter": "Let's take this a step further. Socialize healthcare. Eliminate insurance carriers from the equation - that will reduce costs at least 25 percent immediately. Eliminate malpractice insurance. Another percent. Eliminate pharmaceutical advertising. Another 10 percent. Open the bidding process for all medications....""
JJ: When communism was established in the Soviet Union, Lenin thought he would also have such savings so he could establish a utopia. It wasn't long before they had such food shortages that the capitalists pigs had to share food with them. His pride was so great he tried to stop the inflow of help.
"Sickened1": "You do realize that we have all paid Medicare taxes for years along with Federal and State and SS taxes out of our paychecks.
"Those on Medicare aren't just getting a free ride. Most of them have earned it and payed for it."
JJ: That's what I said. It's not paid for by free money dropping out of the sky, but by taxes. Unfortunately, we have to borrow tons of money to pay for all our programs from the poor folk in China.
"X15" wrote: "A better comparison would be British vs. US health care costs. If government help causes higher prices, the government-run British system should be much more expensive than the US system."
JJ: Fact: our government run health care costs are $9600 per person per year. Britian's is around $3200. Our high costs are what they are and not related to anything the English do.
If we wanted to lower our costs and be like them we would need to make a number of changes:
Unless we are willing to do these and other cost savings actions the magic you think Obama is going to accomplish on cost savings will not happen. Costs will only increase.
"Graymatter": "The fact is having a risk pool which consists of the entire population is much more cost effective than what the US does in terms of government insurance. The US provides socialistic insurance (Medicaid, Medicare, VA) to high risk, high need, high utilizing populations, NOT to the population as a whole. Anybody comparing these systems to countries with true socialistic medicine or even national health plans is making false comparisons. I would even argue they are making false comparisons in order to promote lies and a skewed right wing political agenda."
JJ: You haven't done your math. The government already insures 41 percent of the population with a one payer system at a cost of around $9600 per person. If we spread this out over 100 percent of America it still equals around $4000 per person. This is higher than any other socialized country spends per person. Obviously we are doing something very wrong and do not want to expand upon it until we solve the earlier points I mentioned.
Copyright © 2010 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved