What is the REAL nanny state?

The preamble of the US Constitution says: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” That means the government should act in the best interests of the people and in a way that betters our lives such as protecting our health, liberty, and property. Some conservatives like Senator Rand Paul complain about a “nanny state” restricting our freedom to eat as much as we want when we want, waste energy, and to be homophobic no matter that doing all that might encroach on other’s rights.

Recently Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) said:

Sen. Rand Paul, in a tussle with an Energy Department official Thursday, complained about what he described as burdensome, “busybody” regulations that were forcing him to buy a bad bowl.

“Frankly, my toilets don’t work in my house. And I blame you and people like you who want to tell me what I can install in my house, what I can do. You restrict my choices,” Paul said.

The issue on the table was a 2007 law requiring a phase-in of energy efficient bulbs. Paul and others are trying to repeal portions of the law, arguing that it restricts the American consumer.

At a Thursday hearing on the issue, Paul — a freshman Republican who shares a libertarian streak with his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) — aimed his complaints at Kathleen Hogan, a deputy assistant at the Energy Department.

He began his remarks by asking Hogan if she was pro-choice. She replied that she was “pro-choice of bulbs.”

“The point is that most members of your administration probably would be frank and would be up front to characterize themselves as being pro-choice for abortion,” Paul said.

Toilets join light bulbs on Sen. Rand Paul’s list of necessities burdened by ‘busybody’ rules0

Setting aside the ridiculous point of comparing abortion to buying light bulbs, he isn’t the only cheap labor conservative to complain about government regulations that force you to change the behavior you are use to.

I understand Paul’s point about low flow toilets. Early models were clunky, but the current models are cutting edge and leave the old complaints behind.

I support the use of CFL or LED light bulbs over the old inefficient incandescent bulbs that haven’t really changed in over 100 years. I have several CFL bulbs and one of them I bought in 2003 and it is still working. I have not had to change a light bulb for more than 3 years now and I have seen a slight reduction in my electric bill. I plan on moving to the even better LED bulbs once the costs moderate a bit more.

What moron would want to spend money on old bulbs and give up savings on their electric bill? Sen Rand Paul I guess and other Luddites like him. Besides I would rather spend extra now for new technology and make that transition than be forced to do it later when we have to save energy either because oil is running out or some other nasty reason. I’m sure there will be someone who demands the right to pay $10 a gallon to gas up their old SUV that gets 5 miles to the gallon.

To me that is being stupid.

There is also complaints about the insurance mandate and other parts of the new health care reform law, belly aching about the First Lady’s efforts to curb child obesity, and the First Family speaking out against bullying.

They might have a point about the insurance mandate of the health care law over reaching by taxing people who don’t buy health insurance, but who would want to let insurance companies decide if life-saving procedures were cost-effective? Why do some people want to put profit over people? How is that moral?

At least if the government decided what was covered, those decisions wouldn’t be based on the bottom line. Just talk to people who spend hundred of thousands of dollars so they can have a few more weeks with their loved one. Compassionate people can’t and won’t put a price tag or profit over their loved one.

I don’t worry about rules and regulations meant to benefit the most people but I do worry, and find it ironic, that people like Senator Rand Paul thinks its okay to interfere in a woman’s health decisions while whining about the government doing that to us.

He would rather force women to have unwanted children, have the IRS police if tax dollars were used for abortions, yet doesn’t want to spend money to help take care of those children.

It seems when Democrats “overreach” they at least help the most people but when the GOP overreach they want to hurt the most people.

What is really a “nanny state”? One that tries to better the human condition or one that wants to be a selfish ass.

Health care reform passes House but it’s bittersweet

The massive overhaul of our broken health care insurance system started late Saturday night when the US House of Representatives passed H R 3962 by a vote of 220 to 215. While this was a historic day, the victory was bittersweet as an unneeded amendment banning paying for abortion for anyone who buys insurance from the public option or the exchange was added at the last minute. Some believe that amendment will be removed when the House and Senate meet to combine their bills but one never knows.

The “Stupak of Michigan Amendment” showed up in the last few weeks of debate on the bill and, at least to me, was being seriously considered late Friday night when the frame work of debate was agreed on by the House leadership. The fear was the overall bill would fail unless Rep Stupak had his amendment voted on.

64 Democrats, including some women, like Rep. Marcy Kaptur (Ohio 9th District), voted to restrict paying for abortion – effectively restricting a legal right women enjoy at this time.

What is ironic is the current bill includes allowing insurance to pay for “pray healing”.

So freaky religious people who believe praying can heal were more important than women’s rights.

And funny, in a WTF? way, 26 of those Democrats who voted to restrict paying for abortion voted NO on the final bill.

Here is the list of 26 Democrats who voted “Aye” on Stupak but “Nay” on the final bill:

Altmire, Barrow, Boccieri, Boren, Bright, Chandler, Childers, Davis (AL), Davis (TN), Gordon (TN), Griffith, Holden, Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Melancon, Peterson, Ross, Shuler, Skelton, Tanner, Taylor, Teague

64 Democrats on the Wrong Side of Stupak-Pitts 

There is still work to be done as the reform debate moves to the Senate. Hopefully a final bill can be introduced and voted on before the end of the year.

Dangerous Right Wing Douchebags

After hearing about another right winger loon killing people in the name of “Amerirka”, I decided to put together an all star list of right wing pundits who don’t care what they say, don’t take responsibility for their words, and just hate America and what it stands for. Feel free to print out my poster and post around your community to warn them of these chowder heads because they help victimize everyone.

I really wish these people would be victims of the economic melt down.

When talking heads go too far

I have always had a beef with the conservative pundit class, the talking heads on the various cable channels and talk radio. The main one is they like to lie to their audience and play into any bias the audience member already has like hating women, foreigners, and liberals. They never seem to get that some people do get influenced by them and their rhetoric. They accuse the left of doing the same thing when they complain about liberal bias but feign outrage when told their toxic views can do the same to others. Words have meaning or else why say them? I don’t support domestic terrorism and I don’t think conservative talking heads should either.

On the June 1st edition of Countdown with Keith Olbermann, he pointed to the constant verbal attacks on Dr George Tiller, the doctor murdered on Sunday, by Fox News talking head Bill O’Reilly and how Mr. O’Reilly refuses to accept some of the blame for the egging on the person who pulled the trigger with his inflammatory speech.

Here is the segment:

Don’t get me wrong. I support free speech including views I disagree with but there is a line not to be crossed at least by reasonable people.

Not once during the 8 year nightmare that was the Bush administration did I hear any left side pundits suggest that Bush be taken out in some way other than through legal means like impeachment.

As exasperating as it was being led down the stupid road by the lead ignorant cuss that was our President at the time, no one wished ill will toward him beyond making fun of his speeches, mannerisms, etc….

What O’Reilly fails to do is acknowledge that Tiller’s murder was something illegal and stupid.

O’Reilly tried to blame the left and Randall Terry, of Operation Rescue, almost gleefully gloated about the murder:

Terry: The point that must be emphasized over, and over, and over again: pro-life leaders and the pro-life movement are not responsible for George Tiller’s death. George Tiller was a mass-murder and, horrifically, he reaped what he sowed.

Q: So who is responsible …

Terry: The man who shot him is responsible …

Q: … because that makes it sound like you were saying that he [Tiller] is responsible.

Terry: The man who shot him is responsible.

Q: What did you mean by “he reaped what he sowed”?

Terry: He was a mass-murder. He sowed death. And then he reaped death in a horrifying way.

The event came to an utterly bizarre ending when Terry said that Tiller’s murder “can be a teaching moment for what child-killing is really all about” … and then seemed to ask those in attendance if they’d be willing to buy him lunch – he likes Guinness and chicken wings

Terry Declares That Tiller “Reaped What He Sowed,” Then Asks If Someone Will Buy Him Lunch

Conservatives like that almost never accept responsibility for their words or actions even when they demand others do the same.

That’s why I refuse to listen or watch their shows at all and ask my friends to do the same. I don’t support domestic terrorism and I don’t think conservative talking heads should either.