6.25.2009

CNN: The Socialized Medicine Shopping Network

I can't help but laugh at CNN today. They have been covering the Socialized medicine bill and how the politicians are now saying they can cut the costs down to X dollars. I say X dollars because I don't know how low they are going to go. Earlier it was $1.6T, then it was $1T, and now the latest report is that the politicians have been working in a bipartisan way to reduce the costs to under one trillion dollars, yet still make sure that 97% of Americans are covered.

CNN is reporting this as if it's a completely factual and accurate statement. They have no clue what has been cut or what money has been raised to change the financing of this program, but who cares? Who needs details? The statists are telling us that they have reduced the cost, so they must have, right?

But wait, there's more! Call in the next 30 minutes, and you'll find out that it's spread over the next 10 years, so it's not really a trillion dollars, it's just a few billion per year, no worries!

That's what Obama needs. He needs to get Billy Mays to make his informercials from now on. They'd at least be entertaining then, in a gallows humor sort of way.

Oh and one last thing: the program still leaves 3% of Americans without coverage, that means about 10 million people. Guess what: there are less than that many people in America today who are both unable to get coverage and legally within the United States. So then, who is this program going to cover? Who knows, it's down to just $999,999,999,999!!!

Here's how to order!

Labels: ,

+facebook   +newsvine   digg it +digg   delicious +del.icio.us   reddit +reddit
Posted by Tom on 12:01 PM | | Comments | links to this post

6.23.2009

Read all the Ayn Rand you can get your hands on

I've been doing that myself, and man oh man it's like my brain has been opened up to reality for the first time. So far I've read "Atlas Shrugged", "The Voice of Reason", "The Objectivism Lexicon" and I'm halfway through "The New Left."

Rand, more than being just an Author, was a brilliant philosopher, and she invented her philosophy called Objectivism, describing it as such:

My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:

  1. Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
  2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
  3. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his ownhappiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
  4. The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The governmentacts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.
That's exactly right. I'm going to keep reading all of her books that I can get my hands on, this is great stuff.

Labels: ,

+facebook   +newsvine   digg it +digg   delicious +del.icio.us   reddit +reddit
Posted by Tom on 12:23 AM | | Comments | links to this post

6.18.2009

Obama is Missing a Golden Opportunity on Iran

I really wish we hadn't elected such a rookie as the POTUS.

A quick look at the twitter stream for Iranian Election News shows that a terrific thing is happening: an oppressive, totalitarian government is trying to silence their people, but using the technology of the internet the people are still making their voices heard.

It is obvious what is going on: the Iranian government rigged the election and is now trying to cover it up. America should lead the way and gather international support for the citizens of Iran to pressure the government to stop censoring, stop banning media coverage, to open up their activities to the eyes of the world. This is where Obama should do what all Democrats all say they're going to do in international affairs (but they never really do): build an international coalition to peacefully resolve an important conflict by applying pressure from all sides on the offending government.

Where is Obama on this? "We need to sit back and let the Iranians figure this out."

Great job, assclown.

Labels: ,

+facebook   +newsvine   digg it +digg   delicious +del.icio.us   reddit +reddit
Posted by Tom on 1:56 PM | | Comments | links to this post

6.08.2009

Very Interesting Article on Objectivism

I've been reading a lot of Ayn Rand and Objectivist literature lately and I stumbled across a very interesting article this morning that is an interview of Ayn Rand from, of all places, Playboy. Here's my favorite part:

PLAYBOY: What about other public needs? Do you consider the post office, for example, a legitimate function of government?

RAND: Now let's get this straight. My position is fully consistent. Not only the post office, but streets, roads, and above all, schools, should all be privately owned and privately run. I advocate the separation of state and economics. The government should be concerned only with those issues which involve the use of force. This means: the police, the armed services, and the law courts to settle disputes among men. Nothing else. Everything else should be privately run and would be much better run.
I couldn't agree more. And then there's this:

PLAYBOY: Would you favor U.S. withdrawal from the United Nations?

RAND: Yes. I do not sanction the grotesque pretense of an organization allegedly devoted to world peace and human rights, which includes Soviet Russia, the worst aggressor and bloodiest butcher in history, as one of its members. The notion of protecting rights, with Soviet Russia among the protectors, is an insult to the concept of rights and to the intelligence of any man who is asked to endorse or sanction such an organization. I do not believe that an individual should cooperate with criminals, and, for all the same reasons, I do not believe that free countries should cooperate with dictatorships.
Hell yes!

You should definitely read this article.

Labels: ,

+facebook   +newsvine   digg it +digg   delicious +del.icio.us   reddit +reddit
Posted by Tom on 11:04 AM | | Comments | links to this post