President Obama said illegal aliens would not be covered by health insurance.
Congressman Wilson called him a liar.
Who is right? Well, actually Congressman Wilson was right, though he was unpardonably rude about it.
The House version protects illegal aliens but the Senate version 'sort of' doesn't. The Democrats are now running around trying to make an honest man of the president. Sort of.
What do you think?
Will the final bill say it is against the law for illegal aliens to be covered? No.
Will it say illegal aliens must pay for medical care? No.
What will it say about illegal aliens? Probably nothing.
Illegal aliens will not be covered by medical insurance, but the first hospital that refuses to admit a pregnant illegal alien will be in the courts and before Justice Sodomeyer so fast you would think it was a legal hurricane.
It will be declared unconstitutional discrimination. And from that time forward, legal resident's premiums and fees will cover the cost of illegal aliens pro bono health care. Kind of like no fault auto insurance.
How long will this take? I bet the day after Obama signs the bill, the woman will be walked into a selected hospital by three lawyers, a police witness and a dozen cameras. They will pick a federally funded hospital and an administrator who goes by the book. He will express his politically correct regrets and refuse service. Of course, after the cameras are turned off she will be admitted as a hardship case.
The next day, after the service is legally refused, someone will walk the legal mumbo jumbo document to the good justice's desk and she will sign an injunction against implimenting any restrictions. It will then be against the law to refuse service to anyone for anything based on immigration status. (of course it is already but, heh, we aren't going to let the facts interfere with a good political joust are we?)
I'm taking bets.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
Children and Suicide in Japan
A response to the Japan Times Herald article:
A family walks into the supermarket and the child starts to misbehave. A stranger comes up and disciplines the child.
Generally speaking, parents don't like strangers yelling at their kids. I think this is much like the Japanese feeling towards foriegners (strangers) castigating them on their own 'family' behav ior.
As for the subject at hand, modern views on suicide in the west are firmly entrenched in the Judeo-Christian value of the human being as a child of God.
Without this concept, suicide, whether blatently steping in front of a Shinkansen or wandering off into the forest at old age, is concidered a normal part of society divesting itself of unneeded and/or excess hindrences in the path of healthy development.
People in the west (read: Christian, Jewish, Moslem) have a view that is different from older traditional norms and while it is true that the Abrahamic tradition is the majority today, it is not the older tradition, as you point out using Plato. Plato, remembered names in Greece, Rome, Egypt and countless unremembered names of people who committed and/or were given the 'honorable' way out to commit suicide
As I have pointed out in my past writings, I consider suicide the cowards way out and the ultimate screw you to anyone who loves or depends on you.
Child suicide and bullying in Japan mixes the equation with inept teaching and disciplinary methods (or lack of any method) and children just trying to escape the trap of pain as any rational being would. In traditional societies, child suicide is rare, though child mortality is not. Children are quite valuable and treated as such since their presence ensures the continuity of the farm, family and clan whereas in today's city culture children are more often seen as a hindrance and impediment to the freedom and lifestyle of the adults.
The modern city lifestyle is selfish and indulgent. Over crowding and the aberant behavior of unsupervised young is much like we see in elephant herds when the adolescent bulls are left without adults to guide them. Children in modern cities turn to running amock and those who aren't part of the 'in' crowd or can't handle the pressure are bullied into line or opt out.
The ultimate 'in' crowd for these adolescent societal losers is the suicide club.
But again, in the animist, shaminist view that underpins the East, the weak, infirm, elderly and just plain failures of society should do everyone a service and dispense with themselves. Its ultimately better for everyone. The bully is the tool nature uses to cull the herd or whip them into shape. There is a reason it's called the 'bully pulpit'. This is the view in Japan. And in history.
You may not like it. It may be wrong , there may be a better way; but interestingly, the idea that seems to be coming up in the health care debate about when to cut off care in hopeless or excessively expensive cases seems to hint at the circle returning of society deciding its time to walk out into the forest and die. Logan's Run?
A family walks into the supermarket and the child starts to misbehave. A stranger comes up and disciplines the child.
Generally speaking, parents don't like strangers yelling at their kids. I think this is much like the Japanese feeling towards foriegners (strangers) castigating them on their own 'family' behav ior.
As for the subject at hand, modern views on suicide in the west are firmly entrenched in the Judeo-Christian value of the human being as a child of God.
Without this concept, suicide, whether blatently steping in front of a Shinkansen or wandering off into the forest at old age, is concidered a normal part of society divesting itself of unneeded and/or excess hindrences in the path of healthy development.
People in the west (read: Christian, Jewish, Moslem) have a view that is different from older traditional norms and while it is true that the Abrahamic tradition is the majority today, it is not the older tradition, as you point out using Plato. Plato, remembered names in Greece, Rome, Egypt and countless unremembered names of people who committed and/or were given the 'honorable' way out to commit suicide
As I have pointed out in my past writings, I consider suicide the cowards way out and the ultimate screw you to anyone who loves or depends on you.
Child suicide and bullying in Japan mixes the equation with inept teaching and disciplinary methods (or lack of any method) and children just trying to escape the trap of pain as any rational being would. In traditional societies, child suicide is rare, though child mortality is not. Children are quite valuable and treated as such since their presence ensures the continuity of the farm, family and clan whereas in today's city culture children are more often seen as a hindrance and impediment to the freedom and lifestyle of the adults.
The modern city lifestyle is selfish and indulgent. Over crowding and the aberant behavior of unsupervised young is much like we see in elephant herds when the adolescent bulls are left without adults to guide them. Children in modern cities turn to running amock and those who aren't part of the 'in' crowd or can't handle the pressure are bullied into line or opt out.
The ultimate 'in' crowd for these adolescent societal losers is the suicide club.
But again, in the animist, shaminist view that underpins the East, the weak, infirm, elderly and just plain failures of society should do everyone a service and dispense with themselves. Its ultimately better for everyone. The bully is the tool nature uses to cull the herd or whip them into shape. There is a reason it's called the 'bully pulpit'. This is the view in Japan. And in history.
You may not like it. It may be wrong , there may be a better way; but interestingly, the idea that seems to be coming up in the health care debate about when to cut off care in hopeless or excessively expensive cases seems to hint at the circle returning of society deciding its time to walk out into the forest and die. Logan's Run?
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
ABC Can You Believe?
Even mainstream might be getting nervous.
Personally I like this approach: I think congress should pass the law to give everyone all the health care they need and want. This will make the bleeding hearts happy.
The doctors will get paid by the same people who are paying the auto dealers for all the "cash for clunkers" they took in (but haven't seen a dime for yet), so the doctors will all go bankrupt and say "what the hell am I doing this for?" They will quit because they can't pay their bills. We will then all be entitled to the same care no one can get. So the far right will be happy.
We can then all take mid-afternoon naps, elect a famous model for the next president, drink ourselves into a contented stupor (our money will have no value so you better learn how to make your own) and join Mexico. Then Mexico will be happy cause they got their land back.
Everyone wins, Olay!
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Hey Mr Congressman, I want YOUR Health Care Plan
Why can't we all have the public health care plan all our congressional public servants have? Oh, I forgot, WE are THEIR public servants.
We need a PRIVATE health insurance plan, run by PRIVATE insurance companies with PUBLIC sponsorship. That means, if my premium is $100, the government should pay 70%.
BUT ALL premiums for children up to 18 should be 100% paid by the government to private insurance companies - perhaps through their schools. And university students should be spnsored through their university plan regardless of age. This will inspire kids to go to university.
Congress should make it illegal for insurance companies to cancel policies.
If someone losses their job or is homeless then the government should pick up the tab 100%.
And doctors need to be protected from law suits. Errors and corrective treatment should be addressed through additional medical treatment. If the doctor's mistake shows incompitence or neglect they should lose their license to practice. Lawyers need to get off the gravy train.
How about that?
We need a PRIVATE health insurance plan, run by PRIVATE insurance companies with PUBLIC sponsorship. That means, if my premium is $100, the government should pay 70%.
BUT ALL premiums for children up to 18 should be 100% paid by the government to private insurance companies - perhaps through their schools. And university students should be spnsored through their university plan regardless of age. This will inspire kids to go to university.
Congress should make it illegal for insurance companies to cancel policies.
If someone losses their job or is homeless then the government should pick up the tab 100%.
And doctors need to be protected from law suits. Errors and corrective treatment should be addressed through additional medical treatment. If the doctor's mistake shows incompitence or neglect they should lose their license to practice. Lawyers need to get off the gravy train.
How about that?
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)