wow. woooowwwwwwwww. frank still plays the rebel-- the son of a great apologist who is out to rid the republican temple of money changers. more power to you Frankie!
You know, in reflecting more on this article it does have a few holes. He claims that we have been electing perceived "believing" politicians only for them to turn around and in essence, disqualify themselves with other policies that are ungodly. Sure, I agree. But then the point is that although Obama is pro-choice and gay friendly, over all his other qualities trump that cause he's a good guy. I agree, he is seemingly a good guy and has a lot of qualities (seemingly) that I would like to see in the next president. (Especially that he's not Hillary, or a Bush, or a 30 year politician.)
But to my point. Is it just another case of picking the lesser of two evils? He still holds tightly to values that are very opposed to mine, yet because he is the closest thing to righteous, he is now the standard of righteousness. It becomes "good enough". Now, I know it's a lot to ask for any politician to possess all the qualities and values I want, but we still must have standards right?
It's just interesting how we do that as sinful humans continue to pick good enough, and think it is actually "good enough"... This is really starting to ramble. Anyhow, just what I was thinking about. Oh and, Yes We CAN!!! Go Obama!!
P.S. Anyone else a little concerned we'd have a prez with the initials B.O.??? "Hey B.O. mind using some D.O.derant??" "P-U!! Who has that B.O. oh sorry Mr. Prez!!"
David - good point. We can't look to the government to bring about righteousness. Not gonna happen.
As for the upcoming election: while I'm not quick to jump on the bash Bush bandwagon I have been dissapointed with Republicans for a few years now. However, I am not quick to agree with Mr. Schaffer that the Republicans in office are evil and putting car manufacturers and oil companies and those profiteering ahead of the environment. Despite what some would say, there are just as many if not more true scientists who haven't bowed their knees at the altar of climate change politics. My notso-humble opinion is that it is just that - politics rather than objective science.
As for Obama - he is quite inspiring. He seems to be uniting his party, while Hillary is still Bush-bashing, and her campaign can't come up with much to bring against her opponent except to make Xerox jokes.
However - the pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-gay, socialized medicine, raise taxes (without lowering spending), and surrender in Iraq and leave it to the terrorists stuff does not make me feel all warm and cozy at night.
Hey you know Steve, socialized medicine isn't all that bad. You should give it a try like Canada. It's awesome to pay 40% of your income in taxes along with 12% sales tax. Awesome I tell you. And we just got approved for a new .02$ carbon tax. Woo hoo. But hey, everyone has medical coverage. Thats a positive.
Yeah, socialized medicine is so great, Canadians routinely come ucross the border (particularly into New York) and pay cash for services. How long does it take to see a doctor if say, you have an ear infection?
It just floors me that we would be so eager to hand 30% of our current economy over to the already bloated government and think that they can do a better job at running it. We have government run healthcare - V.A. hospitals - are they well run? How about a "single-payor system" - we have that too - it's bankrupt -it's called medicare. How about insuring "the poor" - got that too, it's called Medicaid.
In Illinois, a family can earn 50-60k per year and still qualify to have their children covered under state medicaid - I know this for a fact because MY family qualifies under our current rules - and they want to cover MORE people!!!!?!?! Who's left - the "POOR" people who make $75k who aren't currently covered?!?!?! And they wonder why states go bankrupt. The prospect doesn't thrill me at all, but I'm afraid it looks like we'll be there soon.
As much as I know there are problems with socialized medicine there are benefits. For instance my mom goes into an ER in Vegas cause she isn't feeling well, and has been making payments on it for the last 5 years.
My wife had our son, had major complications at birth, we needed an extra week at the hospital. We've never seen one single bill. Ambulance rides, not a penny. I have an allergic reaction, I need to go to the ER. In California I'm paying it off for the next 5 years if I don't have a job with benefits. In Canada, no bills. Ever. There are some major issues. In the states, it would take about two days to get an MRI for a torn knee. In Canada there are 6 month waits for one. If the system is hit hard there can be unbearable circumstances with people waiting for days to get a room in a hospital. But honestly, everyone in Canada has healthcare. It really isn't such a bad thing when you live here and get over how much is taken from our paychecks...
We had great insurance in California that we could afford - covered EVERYTHING as well. I'd rather pay for it myself and decide where my money goes. Though I understand. It's just the notion that they will do a better job - not the case. The main problem with our system is litigation - that's why costs have gone up. Liability insurance.
I agree. And idealistically, everyone can have great insurance coverage, but so many don't. And idealistically, socialized medicine would work but it fails in many ways as well.
10 comments:
wow. woooowwwwwwwww. frank still plays the rebel-- the son of a great apologist who is out to rid the republican temple of money changers. more power to you Frankie!
amen
You know, in reflecting more on this article it does have a few holes. He claims that we have been electing perceived "believing" politicians only for them to turn around and in essence, disqualify themselves with other policies that are ungodly. Sure, I agree. But then the point is that although Obama is pro-choice and gay friendly, over all his other qualities trump that cause he's a good guy. I agree, he is seemingly a good guy and has a lot of qualities (seemingly) that I would like to see in the next president. (Especially that he's not Hillary, or a Bush, or a 30 year politician.)
But to my point. Is it just another case of picking the lesser of two evils? He still holds tightly to values that are very opposed to mine, yet because he is the closest thing to righteous, he is now the standard of righteousness. It becomes "good enough". Now, I know it's a lot to ask for any politician to possess all the qualities and values I want, but we still must have standards right?
It's just interesting how we do that as sinful humans continue to pick good enough, and think it is actually "good enough"... This is really starting to ramble. Anyhow, just what I was thinking about. Oh and, Yes We CAN!!! Go Obama!!
P.S. Anyone else a little concerned we'd have a prez with the initials B.O.??? "Hey B.O. mind using some D.O.derant??" "P-U!! Who has that B.O. oh sorry Mr. Prez!!"
Looking to the "state" to provide the nation spiritual rebirth has never gone well for the church, it is a dangerous marrige
David - good point. We can't look to the government to bring about righteousness. Not gonna happen.
As for the upcoming election: while I'm not quick to jump on the bash Bush bandwagon I have been dissapointed with Republicans for a few years now. However, I am not quick to agree with Mr. Schaffer that the Republicans in office are evil and putting car manufacturers and oil companies and those profiteering ahead of the environment. Despite what some would say, there are just as many if not more true scientists who haven't bowed their knees at the altar of climate change politics. My notso-humble opinion is that it is just that - politics rather than objective science.
As for Obama - he is quite inspiring. He seems to be uniting his party, while Hillary is still Bush-bashing, and her campaign can't come up with much to bring against her opponent except to make Xerox jokes.
However - the pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-gay, socialized medicine, raise taxes (without lowering spending), and surrender in Iraq and leave it to the terrorists stuff does not make me feel all warm and cozy at night.
Hey you know Steve, socialized medicine isn't all that bad. You should give it a try like Canada. It's awesome to pay 40% of your income in taxes along with 12% sales tax. Awesome I tell you. And we just got approved for a new .02$ carbon tax. Woo hoo. But hey, everyone has medical coverage. Thats a positive.
Yeah, socialized medicine is so great, Canadians routinely come ucross the border (particularly into New York) and pay cash for services. How long does it take to see a doctor if say, you have an ear infection?
It just floors me that we would be so eager to hand 30% of our current economy over to the already bloated government and think that they can do a better job at running it. We have government run healthcare - V.A. hospitals - are they well run? How about a "single-payor system" - we have that too - it's bankrupt -it's called medicare. How about insuring "the poor" - got that too, it's called Medicaid.
In Illinois, a family can earn 50-60k per year and still qualify to have their children covered under state medicaid - I know this for a fact because MY family qualifies under our current rules - and they want to cover MORE people!!!!?!?! Who's left - the "POOR" people who make $75k who aren't currently covered?!?!?! And they wonder why states go bankrupt. The prospect doesn't thrill me at all, but I'm afraid it looks like we'll be there soon.
As much as I know there are problems with socialized medicine there are benefits. For instance my mom goes into an ER in Vegas cause she isn't feeling well, and has been making payments on it for the last 5 years.
My wife had our son, had major complications at birth, we needed an extra week at the hospital. We've never seen one single bill. Ambulance rides, not a penny. I have an allergic reaction, I need to go to the ER. In California I'm paying it off for the next 5 years if I don't have a job with benefits. In Canada, no bills. Ever. There are some major issues. In the states, it would take about two days to get an MRI for a torn knee. In Canada there are 6 month waits for one. If the system is hit hard there can be unbearable circumstances with people waiting for days to get a room in a hospital. But honestly, everyone in Canada has healthcare. It really isn't such a bad thing when you live here and get over how much is taken from our paychecks...
We had great insurance in California that we could afford - covered EVERYTHING as well. I'd rather pay for it myself and decide where my money goes. Though I understand. It's just the notion that they will do a better job - not the case. The main problem with our system is litigation - that's why costs have gone up. Liability insurance.
I agree. And idealistically, everyone can have great insurance coverage, but so many don't. And idealistically, socialized medicine would work but it fails in many ways as well.
I guess we just need more healing crusades!
Post a Comment