Today’s column asks why liberals aren’t applying the precautionary principle—first, do no harm—to health-care reform.

“So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive”

He’s black. At least half of him.

What? Don’t you know that the left is concerned only with the superfical sybology of Obama? Why do you think he know longer commands his legions of slavish sycophants on election day? They made their statement and now they’re off looking for the next pet rock fad.

They’re easily hypnotizd by the cover…not the book. To read that would take actual effort and supporting Obama is all about image, not thinking.

The truth is that Obama possesses a mediocre intellect. He owes most of his accomplishments to affirmative action, political correctness, and speech writers who understand the American public. He has no published body of work to speak of…unless you count his narssicistic autobiographies that were likely ghost written by William Ayers. (Experts have studied Ayers writing style and characteristics and they match Obama’s prose almost perfectly.) He still refuses to relaease his college transcripts and thesis. His legal “career” is devoid of any significant accomplishment. He wrote 1 article while editor of the Harvard Law Review…a postition he was awarded to satify the universities diversity fetish.

He’s all puffer and no fish.

Aw Bobby and Biscuit. Hey answer a question: If George Bush Was An Idiot:
 If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how he inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
 If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

 If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

 If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

 If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved? 

 If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

 If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

 If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent “Austrian language,“ would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

 If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

 If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

 If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word “advice” would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?

 If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?

 If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

 If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

 If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved.

 If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

 If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

 If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Because it’s not about health care…it’s about a leftist power grab.

Leftism is the enemy of free will therefore, the only way leftism can be imposed is thru force and coercion. Having control of a mans medical care is second only to controlling the food supply with regards to authoritarian control.

Convince enough people that taking over health care is a good thing…by exploiting racial, ethnic, gender and class resntment, and you have control over everyone.

That’s why the excuses put forth don’t make sense.

They don’t need to. All they need do is distract and deflect the stupid long enough for the trap to be sprung.

Do no harm to others and Bart throws the gauntlet at liberals and health care advocates, automatically assuming that everyone has his assumption : Health Care for all is bad.
  Why not save or apply the rhethoric of do no harm to Health Insurers. Oh, we can not do that. They are businessmen, capitalists. Do no harm does not apply there. We can question them ,their motives, methods, for that reason. Exactly.

Bart does not like liberals and healthcare. Duh. This should surprise only alien visitors from outer space who have not been back to Earth for nine centuries or more.

“Dork Ork, Bart not like ?“

“Ork Dork, aada, nada…Nah dadaa…“.

[alien surprise]

Peat bogs release CO2 and methane from rotting vegetation but the REASON those bogs are releasing so much gas is that previously frozen ground, permafrost, is thawing.

Is it enough to be a concern ? That is the only relevant question, not whether it outweighs deforestation in the Amazon Basin or not.

Where is Bobby when I need his advice or Enviro Scott. Help—what should we do? Pass another law and blame Bush?
“Climate change: For peat’s sake”
Nov 6th 2009
From Economist.com

The world’s wetlands are big sources of greenhouse gases. PEATY wetlands emit about 1.3 billion tonnes of CO2 a year as a result of human activity that drains them and thus exposes them to the oxidative effect of the atmosphere. This figure does not include the effect of fire on dried-up bogs, which can double the amount. That, at least, is the conclusion of a report published by Wetlands International, a lobby group, this week. Drained peat occupies 0.3% of the world’s land surface, but is responsible for 6% of man-made CO2 emissions. Indonesia is the biggest emitter, but richer countries are guilty too. However, the report’s findings contrast with the conclusions of a paper on deforestation also published this week in Nature Geoscience. The conventional figure is that tree-felling causes 20% of man-made CO2 emissions, but the new paper puts that figure at closer to 12%. Together, both studies suggest a change of emphasis may be needed, and that efforts should be made to preserve not just forests, but also bogs.

More like a foul ball…The premise is novel & the column began as though we’d see a seriously legitimate point (in the body of the column) worth considering—

But it all fell apart at the very point where Bart should’ve driven the nail home! (Ironic huh?) I’m talking about the 3 ‘scenarios’ where this ‘harm’ allegedly will occur:

Ok, #1 I can consider as potential harm…but #2 & #3 are ridiculously far-fetched. Especially #3, where Bart claims that “innovation” (of Biomedical engineering) could suffer if the $$$$$ are less.

That’s way wrong! Innovation comes from the mind. Believe me—Heinrich Hertz, Thomas Jefferson, Gallileo, et al, did NOT have “research dollars” thrown at them. It came from the mind & a desire to create. A dollar bill has neither capability. Its a piece of paper.

Way to hit a home-run, Bart.

Kaboooooom!

Bart, you are asking why liberals have little reasoning power. On any issue, the same rules of deduction, evidence, position, consistency, and forethought do not apply to liberals or DEMs. They make up their rules as they go along. Common sense is not in their vocabulary.

Post Your Comments: