| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-Misc |
| User: |
"Harry Dope" |
| Date: |
11 Aug 2007 02:32:30 PM |
| Object: |
What would Chairman Hillary do? |
Hillary's Socialist Aspirations
Now this video of Hillary Clinton is classic. She basically called a
reporter who dares to question her fealty to socialism stupid. Just one
more example of what a liar and a hypocrite this woman is:
First lets look at her response in depth:
"Why are you still insisting upon moving that system in here when
particularly it will hurt African American communities more than anyone
else?" Ashanti asked.
"Oh, man - that was a string of misrepresentations about me and the
systems in other countries," Clinton began her response. "Number one, I have
never advocated socialized medicine, and I hope all the journalists hear
that loudly and clearly because that has been a right-wing attack on me for
15 years, and it is wrong."
Never advocated socialized medicine?
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"It's time to replace an 'on your own' society with one based on 'shared
responsibility and prosperity.'"
That is Socialism! She plans on taking away money from those who have it to
pay for insurance for those who cannot afford it.
Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that
envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of
wealth are subject to control by the community[1] for the purposes of
increasing social and economic equality and cooperation.
Remember when she was the driving force for the "health security act" in
1993:
President Bill Clinton has sent health care legislation to Capitol Hill
that is breathtaking in its scope. He strikes a responsive chord with most
Americans when he condemns the current system as bureaucratic and wasteful,
and when he urges a comprehensive reform of the $1 trillion health
system-accounting for about one-seventh of the entire U.S. economy-based on
the principles of security, simplicity, savings, choice, quality, and
personal responsibility.
But although Clinton has stressed the need for simplicity and freedom from
bureaucracy, his legislation offers anything but that. The Administration
followed a 239-page draft, leaked by Members of Congress in September 1993,
with a 1,342-page bill, the "Health Security Act." Emerging from the complex
language of this huge bill is a massive top-down, bureaucratic
command-and-control system that would meticulously govern virtually every
aspect of the delivery and the financing of health care services for the
American people. As The Economist of London observes, "Not since Franklin
Roosevelt's War Production Board has it been suggested that so large a part
of the American economy should suddenly be brought under government
control."
Every aspect of the health care system would be affected by the
legislation. Hundreds of pages of tightly written paragraphs detail sweeping
government control of the health insurance industry: precise benefits that
must be assured; insurance requirements for firms; a "national quality
management program" to oversee the quality of health care services; medical
education, and the training of physicians; the creation of model information
systems; new public health initiatives; the establishment of new federal
loans and guaranty and solvency funds; new assessments and taxes; rural
health programs; a new long-term care program; malpractice reform; antitrust
reform; new penalties to combat fraud and abuse; major changes in the
Medicare program, including a prescription drug benefit and coverage of
state and local government workers; billions of dollars in tax subsidies;
new panels, advisory boards, and commissions; coordination of worker's
compensation and auto insurance with the new standard benefits package; and
dozens of other fundamental changes.
The Plan creates a new state-based system of health insurance cooperatives
that will control the availability of health plans, enforce health budgets,
enroll employers and employees in the new system, collect premiums, and
generally enforce the national insurance rules and regulations. Every
American will be required to obtain health insurance through these health
alliances, or through similar corporate-sponsored plans if they work for a
large firm.
The Plan outlines in meticulous detail what medical services are to be
included in a standardized government health benefits package. These
benefits must be offered by all approved health insurance plans.
The Clinton Plan requires all employers to provide at least the standard
package and to pay at least 80 percent of the cost of the government's
standard health benefits package.
While the President says he does not favor price controls, his plan
bristles with them. In fact, the central cost control in the Clinton Plan is
not competition, nor even "managed competition," but a rigid system of
spending caps on public and private health insurance spending, plus fee
controls for doctors in fee for-service plans. Powerful standby price
controls also are contained in the Plan.
It was socialized medicine then, it is now. But the sheep cheer for her
non-answer.
"Do you think Medicare is socialized medicine?" she challenged him. "To a
degree it is," Ashanti said. "Well, then you are in a small minority in
America because Medicare has literally saved the lives and saved the
resources of countless generations of seniors in our country."
What the hell does Medicare saving lives have to do with the fact that it is
Socialized medicine. I mean she basically said "Medicare isn't socialized
medicine because it helps people and people like it." Um, hello?
I don't even agree with the questioner here, it's not socialized "to a
degree", it is a completely Socialized system of providing health care which
is bankrupting our economy: (h/t Say Anything for the graph)
But hey, Iraq is costing too much right?
Clinton went on to champion Medicare, but criticize the U.S. as the only
"advanced country" to have "so many of its citizens without health care."
Without health care? Every single person in this country has health care.
Legal citizen or not. If you go into a ER you WILL get treated. If you
can't afford to pay us taxpayers have to pay for you.
Which, again, is Socialism.
And something this country needs to fight against. First step, ensure she
never gets into the White House.
--
What we find is that the surge has troops going into areas, where for 4 1/2
years we have not seen our military in action. Naturally, they are routing
out al Qaeda in those areas. That's a good thing.
-- Sen. ***** Durbin
.
|
|
| User: "Rush Simpleton" |
|
| Title: Re: What would Chairman Dope do? |
11 Aug 2007 03:20:19 PM |
|
|
"Hairy Twat" <HHHA@aol.com> wrote in message
news:46be0ef2$0$29696$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Hillary's American Aspirations
Can you say, "Madam President Clinton"?
You stupid ***** republicans are through for at least 100 years.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: What would Chairman Hillary do? |
12 Aug 2007 10:18:52 AM |
|
|
"Harry Dope" <HHHA@aol.com> wrote in message
news:46be0ef2$0$29696$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Never advocated socialized medicine?
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"It's time to replace an 'on your own' society with one based on 'shared
responsibility and prosperity.'"
That is Socialism!
Socialism is the workers' control of the means of production.
What Hillary's advocating is similar to what Jesus (supposedly the object of
the far right's adulation) advocated.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What would Chairman Hillary do? |
11 Aug 2007 02:59:00 PM |
|
|
On Aug 11, 3:32 pm, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
Hillary's Socialist Aspirations
Now this video of Hillary Clinton is classic. She basically called a
reporter who dares to question her fealty to socialism stupid. Just one
more example of what a liar and a hypocrite this woman is:
Nice post. Most of your posts are completely retarded and only have
info from right wing sham news sites.
<what a liar and a hypocrite this (Viec President) is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
Topset72
and in another speech...
"We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly
shatter
our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a
broken
tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero. Assigning young soldiers to a
fruitless
hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight
in what
would be an unwinable urban guerilla war, it could only plunge that
part of
the world into ever greater instability."
"I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use
military force. I think it is also very important for him to know
when
not
to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President
got
it
right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get
bogged
down in the QUAGMIRE inside Iraq."
--***** Cheney, Speech at the Washington Institute for Near East
Policy
April
29, 1991
.
|
|
|
| User: "Everybody Knows" |
|
| Title: Re: What would Chairman Hillary do? |
11 Aug 2007 04:37:52 PM |
|
|
<Topset72@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1186862340.916970.287800@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 11, 3:32 pm, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
Hillary's Socialist Aspirations
and in another speech...
"We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly
shatter
our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a
broken
tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero. Assigning young soldiers to a
fruitless
hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight
in what
would be an unwinable urban guerilla war, it could only plunge that
part of
the world into ever greater instability."
"I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use
military force. I think it is also very important for him to know
when
not
to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President
got
it
right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get
bogged
down in the QUAGMIRE inside Iraq."
--***** Cheney, Speech at the Washington Institute for Near East
Policy
April 29, 1991
Cheney knew over ten years earlier that it would be a mistake to go into
Iraq.
Here's that speech. Those words are found in the last paragraph under the
heading of Did We Go Far Enough?
http://web.archive.org/web/20041130090045/http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/pubs/soref/cheney.htm
Independent
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
