So finally the SCOTUS is going to take a look at Obamacare and decide if the government can force me to purchase health insurance. I have been curious about this for a while, because if they can force me to buy health insurance, can they make me stop buying Diet Coke, which I dearly love? After all, if you give a lab rat the equivalent of 6 quarts of diet soda with aspartame every day for a long time, they will develop tumors. While I think six quarts of anything everyday for extended periods is a bad idea, I'll try to stay on point.
How long until the government-which has always known what is best for me, just ask them-can decide other things that are important to me?
I have a car with T-tops. They could be dangerous in an accident if I rolled over. Will they be outlawed? How about lard? It isn't good for me at all, but the best biscuits in the world must have a combination of lard and buttermilk in order to be delicious. Will the government ban my Dad's biscuit recipe?
How about smoking? While B.O. claims to be tobacco free-he even released his physical to prove it-he is still working those nicotine lozenges pretty good. You seem them in all of the "candid" photo ops that try to show how hard he works between junkets with the fam.
My point is, there are so many better ways to deal with the insurance problems. Making insurance available to be sold across state lines would be a great way to raise the competition and lower the price. See, competition is good. When businesses have to compete for your money, they work harder and give you a better value. If Obamacare is allowed to stand, the competition will eventually be wiped out until the only thing left is the government insurance and ask Canada and Great Britain how that socialized medicine thing is working out for them. Long waits, people dying before they are properly seen, sounds great doesn't it? That's what's in store if this crap isn't repealed.
But to get back on point-the Obama appointee Kagan worked for the government when Obamacare was being foisted on us. She helped to defend this socialized crap when she worked for the Department of Justice. She was never fully vetted(she has a vagina,she is a liberal, what more do they need) and now she is going to make a decision on the very thing she said was legal in the first place? Sounds like she gets to judge the pies at the county fair after making one for the contest, doesn't it? I wonder how she will decide, don't you?
On the other hand is one of my favorite judges- Clarence Thomas. Or as I have come to think of him, the 80's version of Herman Cain. The biased main stream media have hated his guts for years. They found a woman to accuse him of something that may or may not have happened ten years prior.(Sound familiar?) While the alleged action was disgusting- if it did in fact happen- why would you wait 10 years to complain about it?
Anyway, Judge Thomas's wife doesn't like Obamacare and has said so publicly. Yes, you read that right- his wife doesn't like the bill. So apparently, Judge Thomas is so swayed by his wife's charms, that he would be unable to render a fair decision. Crap, I couldn't get my useless ex husband to be faithful and not steal his children's college funds, how do they expect Mrs. Thomas to be able to influence a Supreme Court Judge?
So on one side-helped to decide if the law would be legal; on the other side has a spouse that doesn't like it. Oh, yeah, that seems the same,what do you think?
I hope the individual mandate is shot down. I am scared to think of what all the government would force me to buy-or not buy- if they could.
John Adams said, "Liberty once lost, is lost forever." Think about it. You'll thank me later.
No comments:
Post a Comment