Robbing Peter to pay Paul gains Paul's support

Advertisement

Letter writer Norman Osterman on Nov. 1 accused me of using “stunning mental gymnastics” regarding my opinion on the temporary government shutdown. I’ll accept that. Although intended as criticism, Wiktionary’s definition of mental gymnastics is “difficult and complex logical thought processes.”

What was stunning, however, was his claim that an attempt to delay implementation of Obamacare was “legislative terrorism.” Terrorism more aptly describes government using the IRS to force citizens to buy health insurance.

Doesn’t “big brother” have enough control over us already? Yes, Obamacare was passed (by a small majority of Democrats, 212-219) and was declared constitutional (as a tax) by the Supreme Court. That doesn’t mean it’s a good law.

It’s a very bad law. The mantra, “it’s the law,” doesn’t mean that it’s immune from opposition.

Of course, the writer is correct that the ACA isn’t a single payer/government-run system — I didn’t say it was. Not yet.

As I said, President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid publicly stated their goal is a single-payer system and that will assuredly be their agenda once everyone sees the ACA is an unworkable fiasco.

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Congress had to pass the bill to see what’s in it. Now we’re all seeing what’s in it. And the worst is yet to come.

The old trick of bringing up Medicare and Social Security is a fallacious red herring. Most people on both sides agree that those are now necessary and appropriate — although future funding is in serious jeopardy.

Adding over a trillion dollars (Obamacare cost) to America’s financial burden to enroll under 10 percent of Americans while damaging everyone’s health-care quality is appalling. (As are Obama’s other end-runs around the Constitution like a recent executive order emplacing more intrusive “climate change” regulations.)

Mr. Osterman’s admonition to “Cherish those who seek the truth but beware of those who find it” was OK, but progressive activists should be aware of another apropos Voltaire observation: “In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to another.”

Sound familiar? That’s today’s Democratic Party agenda — a socialistic ploy calling for redistribution of wealth from rich to poor (to the detriment of everyone) to buy votes. Democratic Party politicians are well aware that a political party that robs Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul — its constituents.

Steve Singleton

Walla Walla

Comments

namvet60 8 months ago

How did the comments disappear that were posted from this letter????

0

downhillracer 8 months ago

Let's see. Maybe - going out on a limb here - the moderator deleted them?

Too bad this psychotic-nonsense-of-a-letter ever made it to print.

It does serve a purpose, if only to remind us how enormously out-of-touch Mr. Singleton is with reality.

1

namvet60 8 months ago

hey downhill - maybe you could utilize your critical thinking mode (that's a joke in itself for you) and read the following quote and try to make it compatible with the way the government is being run today by your preferred President? I doubt with your dyslexic mind you will be able to make a coherent statement!

The Quote of the Decade:

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally.

Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better."

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

I seriously doubt that your ability to be-in-touch will even be close to a responsible comment. Your sheeple attitude will prevail.

0

tpeacock 8 months ago

Public discourse is a great freedom, why do abuse the right by stooping to childish name calling. If you're truly a Nam Vet, you've been out of high school, and a grown adult for many years now, though your words don't show it. If you don't agree with someone it's easy to say so without using such a condescending manner!

0

stvsngltn 8 months ago

You find no fault with the insults from the person hiding behind the downhillracer alias who refers to my opinion as psychotic nonsense, Peacock? That says a lot, doesn't it? Well, never mind. I will hit the "suggest removal" button on downhill's low-road, typically immature form of schoolyard name-calling and see if it works.

0

namvet60 8 months ago

Steve you see that only a select group are allowed to criticize and degrade other posters. As the old adage, "Birds of a feather stick together"! Just a little Pun.

0

tpeacock 8 months ago

I've been taking carp and listening to twists on my name forever, so your little pun goes in one ear and out the other. I don't hide behind any online name either, just as Mr. Singleton, I take total ownership of what I have to say, I don't hide behind any pseudo identity.

0

namvet60 8 months ago

well tpeacock - if you had noticed I don't provide discourse unless it is provided about my posts or about me personally. Your post utilizing criticism and degrading my person certainly doesn't make any difference as to the credibility or sincerity of your future comments.

My post still stands that a select group is able to post criticism and degrading posts but when rebutted, it's obviously over the top.

0

tpeacock 8 months ago

I did not notice that or I would have posted against that also. Though we may not agree on things, I have never maligned you, nor would I support others that do so. My point was and is very clear; 'Public discourse is a great freedom, why abuse the right by stooping to childish name calling' is meant for EVERY single poster that resorts to this childish action.

0

tpeacock 8 months ago

And if you look at the time stamps, downhill posted almost half a day after I did, I don't live on this site, I log in maybe every other week. But to reaffirm my stance, I don't care who you are, what political persuasion you follow, or any other divisions, once you become an adult, you should carry yourself as such.

0

downhillracer 8 months ago

Stating observable facts isn't a form of name calling. Calling everything around you as "socialist"? Yup - psychotic.

0

namvet60 8 months ago

Maybe this should be put into the terms of legislative terrorism by this illustrious President:

http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/22/taxpayers-lose-139-million-on-fisker-automotive-loan/#ixzz2lPXP2JvD

I stated this before - "This sure brings the chickens home to roost".

0

downhillracer 8 months ago

Gee, the "Daily Caller" as a reliable source of unbiased news. Nice! Completely out of context, this is known - to those who didn't flunk debate - as a "false equivalent ".

So, how about an accounting of the billions wasted during the little "lets shut down the gubmint" fiasco?

Or the billions wasted in an un-needed weapons system? No?

Perhaps an honest accounting of two UNFUNDED WARS. Trillions? Maybe two.

(crickets)

0

namvet60 8 months ago

Be watching the book shelves in the near future for an autobiography being published by George Soros and written by Harry Reid with bylines from Nancy Pelosi and Patty Murray entitled "The 2013 version of The King and I, how the nuclear option clears the path to Socialism". (Sarc)

0

Igor 7 months, 4 weeks ago

No surprise. Regan reached out to the opposition and as a result was able to get things done. Contrast him with Obama, who refuses to compromise on anything and consequently has the parties at loggerheads. When he was in Seattle earlier this week he proclaimed that he was not an ideologue. I almost died laughing.

I long for the days of the Gipper and Tip O’Neil. Though they were on opposite ends of the political spectrum, they understood that for the betterment of our people they had to work together. Obama should try to lead for a change rather than spending all his time fund raising and campaigning. The Economist is right on. The Economist is a great mag, is relatively apolitical and is staffed with talented writers.

On the subject of the recent change of Senate rules, I predict there will come a day that the Democrats will live to regret their decision to evoke the nuclear option. The purpose of the filibuster was to protect the rights of the minority. Any group of people, political or otherwise, that does not respect the views of the minority within its midst will get its comeuppance someday. The idea behind the filibuster was to encourage compromise.

Have at me downhill.

2

barracuda 7 months, 4 weeks ago

Igor....... I hope you are correct about the coming back to haunt the Democrats.... But, I have a feeling the best that will happen is that they will reverse this change... and the Democrats will skate by with no repercussions of any type.

Happy Thanksgiving Downhiller

1

Igor 7 months, 4 weeks ago

Barracuda,

Thoughtful words. I’ve always enjoyed your postings. So many of your friends on the left are “knee jerk.” I continue to believe that the system the Framers set up was a system that will work for all eternity. Built in were rules to protect the rights of the minority.

Igor

0

Sign in to comment

Click here to sign in
4 free views left!