Dec 23
My congressman
I realized it was time to check out who my congresscritter is. In Roanoke it was Bob "How can I kiss your ass today, Mr. President" Goodlatte.
Here it’s Eric "My last name is spelled wrong" Cantor. He’s neither very bright nor very nice.
First of all, the latest news on his site is from Feb. 2007, where he praises the President’s budget, saying it "will help contain Washington [sic] runaway spending." Perhaps he missed the line on the budget funding the war in Iraq.
And writing in January about "End of the Democrat’s ‘100 Hours’," he shows an incredible lack of intelligence and decorum.
What was Cantor’s most important note about the 100 Hours?
“The 100 hours was not a productive time for America as evidenced by Pelosi exempting her hometown company, Starkist Tuna, from the minimum wage increase.
First of all, Eric, it’s not "Pelosi." Out of general respect for your fellow representatives it’s "Ms. Pelosi," "Rep. Pelosi," or "Speaker of the House Pelosi." Be a grownup.
And don’t you feel just a tad hypocritical complaining about Starkist Tuna? (Starkist Tuna?) Billions to Halliburton? No problem. Millions for a bridge to nowhere for a repub in Alaska? No problem.
But give health insurance to poor kids? No way.
[sigh] I hoped to have a congressman with at least a shred of intelligence, but instead I got Eric Cantor.
December 24th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
If you are looking for representatives with intellegence, you are living in the wrong state. And the wrong country. Possibly the wrong planet.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that government should supply socialized medicine. It can’t even get us through the security lines at the airport quickly; why on earth would we want DC to control our healthcare??
December 27th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the government should run airport security or provide air-traffic control services. Nor does it say the government should provide schools or even build roads.
It doesn’t say the government should offer Social Security or insure the banks. Or that it should provide street lights or traffic signals. Or provide schools.
You get my drift.
But at some point we realized that these kinds of services are, for the most part, good for everyone, so “we” provide them via the government. Sick workers who can’t afford healthcare drag down the economy; it makes sense to keep people healthier. (The Constitution doesn’t provide for the Food and Drug Administration, but I’m glad it’s there.)
And it says something when you’re the only modern industrialized nation that *doesn’t* do something to ensure basic medical care for your citizens — especially those in poverty.
December 28th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
The Constitution doesn’t mention executive privledge either.
IT does however provide a framework to server the people. And if the people think that they might be better served if the government managed health care, it doesn’t prohibit it. And there is plenty of precident.
There are strong reasons for the government to run health care. The underlying economics are not market driven (How much is your life worth to you? If I have the plauge - so does everyone else). Business cannot support rising health costs and insurors are cherry-picking peopel to insure and screwing thier nearly dead corpses rather than paying claims. And if you don’t think you aren’t already paying the costs for uninsured, you aren’t paying attention. You are, in some cases several times over. The sytem has lots of bloat that costs you more to cover those who can’t pay.
Look for a Rant soon on my blog on the subject. If you live long enough.
November 12th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
lxac2tslztxo4lhv