Republicans running the federal government believe, "You are on your own to buy your own health care, to buy your own retirement security..." Obama said. the article - http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051212/pl_nm/florida_dc i say, yes we do, why should it be up to big brother to do it for us?
Just Barrack Obama up to his usual bag of tricks -- incite his followers by twisting and distorting the truth while playing to the ignorants' emotions. This guy has to be the most overhyped politician of all time. Seriously, the guy's speech at the DNC last year was the most unspectacular collection of old, tired, demagoguery and inflammatory remarks I have ever listened to, yet Democratics (desperate for any flicker of hope) are annointing him the next candidate for President. What a joke. This guy is going to continue to stick his foot in his mouth, like he did today, and it will lead to a Howard Dean moment. And I will say I told you so. Social Darwinism. What a buffoon.
Clearly you are not particularly... familiar with the historical usage of 'social Darwinism'. It is a key concept in Mein Kampf, and was particularly a favorite concept of Dr. Joseph Goebbels. In that sense social Darwinism is a turn of phrase with a great deal of baggage attached and implies a taint under any circumstance. In a more general sense, the way in which Darwin’s ideas are applied here is that over the course of natural history if something is ill suited to its environment it will die off if something stronger comes along to fill its niche. In Darwin’s use it isn’t an endorsement or positive judgment, but only a statement of fact. Social Darwinism seems to often go beyond that, judging that if something is weak, it deserves what it gets. I don't know if you've ever seen animals that have starved to death or were dying from diseases like mange, but viewing social issues with that degree of ruthlessness doesn't appeal to me. In extreme cases like the Nazi’s 'social Darwinism' this is interpreted to mean that killing all the people who are handicapped is good because it helps further the course of evolution. In a wider sense, a 'strong race' like the Germans is only doing what is natural by exterminating a 'weak race' like the Jews. A Nazi social Darwinist can go to work at Auschwitz or Birkenau with a smile on his face and whistling a happy tune because history proves that the strong should eliminate the weak to further evolution. In less extreme cases, something like the interstate highway system would not have been built unless the government pursued things with a more circumspect and less Darwinian view of things. From my personal view I generally agree with some of the Darwinian concepts when they are applied appropriately and judiciously. What I don't like are ideologues that follow ideas with mindless devotion. There is a reasonable case to be made that supply-side economics, for instance, can have a short term effect like pouring gas in a carburetor to prime it. Unfortunately people who don't really don't understand the idea think that if a little supply side economics is good, a lot must be better. Poor too much gas in the carburetor and you flood the engine. The same holds true for the application of Darwinian ideas and private sector competition. There is a very legitimate case to be made for judiciously applying these ideas where they are useful. Unfortunately, the policy at this point seems to be applying these ideas with full force and in inappropriate ways to any problem in order to solve it.
Because corporations are unloading the burden of "legacy costs" and entitlements onto the government in the drive to beceome more profitable. The system we have now is a mess of government sponsored programs that's been unable to cope with rising medical costs. Either way, Big Brother is paying. The amount of training into investing markets by the average citizen is probably worse than their favorite system to work card tables at the casino. There's no "hard work" involved in planning one's financial security. OTOH, the financial industry relishes upon short sighted consumers who make hasty decisions and those who pulls the trigger on the next big thing. You're pitting masses upon masses of people who don't spend more than an hour a week on their investments against people who's livelyhood depends on focusing upon one financial sector.... If that's not convincing enough, our median healthcare system isn't even in the top 10 in world. There's two types of health care running inside the US. With patients demanding top-notch imaging, surgical and prescriptive care (which no other country can match), only those who can truly afford high PPO premiums can take swift advantage of it. Not that patients really need top notch technology available.... The unintended consequence is that several millions of Americans get little or no healthcare at all, so they don't even get treated with tools or drugs used during the 80s. If you're young, covered by your employer, or just plain rich, a typical surgery (~$15,000+) will not land you into crippling debt. So keep fit and stay young, and you'll be one of the suckers Uncle Sam is leeching off to pay for bills from someone else. Until it happens to you or your family, that is.
You make claims he is twisting and distorting he truth, but don't point out a single statistic to or provide the slightest bit of evidence to back up your claims. Feel free to run from this thread now.
