Rob Paris Blog

Rob writes about news, economics, politics and other things

Posts Tagged Quotes

And keep your hands off my Medicare

Sep 11

Posted by robparis in General | No Comments

Excerpts from Obama’s speech at a high school in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on August 11, 2009

First Obama said,

“Our deficit will continue to grow because Medicare and Medicaid are on an unsustainable path. Medicare is slated to go into the red in about eight to 10 years. I don’t know if people are aware of that. If I was a senior citizen, the thing I’d be worried about right now is Medicare starts running out of money because we haven’t done anything to make sure that we’re getting a good bang for our buck when it comes to health care. And insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against people for the simple crime of being sick. Now, that’s not a future I want for my children. It’s not a future that I want for the United States of America.”

Obama starts out strong. He admits that both Medicare and Medicaid are on an unsustainable path. He mentions that in 8-10 years, Medicare will be in the red. It’s probably less than 8-10 years, but it’s close enough.

Obama then goes on to make an outrageous claim. He says that insurance companies are profiting by “discriminating” against the sick. That’s not discrimination, that’s called a market. It’s providing a service. Is my plumber “discriminating” against me because I have a broken toilet? Is Grimaldi’s “discriminating” against me because I’m hungry? The insurance companies are providing a service, not “discriminating”.

The key point of Obama’s first statement is that, “Medicare and Medicaid are on an unsustainable path”. Later during the Q&A session of the same speech, Obama gets the following question:

“My name is Peter Schmidt. I’m a state representative from Dover. I’m a senior citizen. I have a wonderful government-run health care plan called Medicare. I like it. It’s affordable, it’s reasonable, nobody tells me what I need to do. I just go to my doctor at the hospital, I get care.

Now, one of the things you’ve been doing in your campaign to change the situation is you’ve been striving for bipartisanship. I think it’s a wonderful idea, but my question is, if the Republicans actively refuse to participate in a reasonable way with reasonable proposals, isn’t it time to just say we’re going to pass what the American people need and what they want, without the Republicans?”

Now here is where Obama has to tell Mr. Schmidt the truth. He’s going to reiterate the point he made 20 minutes earlier about the unsustainable path of Medicare. He’ll talk about how the program is going to run out of money. Wait for it…

“Well, let me make a couple of points. First of all, you make a point about Medicare that’s very important. I’ve been getting a lot of letters, pro and con, for health care reform, and one of the letters I received recently, a woman was very exercised about what she had heard about my plan. She says, “I don’t want government-run health care. I don’t want you meddling in the private marketplace. And keep your hands off my Medicare.” (Laughter.) True story.

And so I do think it’s important for particularly seniors who currently receive Medicare to understand that if we’re able to get something right like Medicare, then there should be a little more confidence that maybe the government can have a role — not the dominant role, but a role — in making sure the people are treated fairly when it comes to insurance. (Applause.)”

What happened to the unsustainable, running out of money part? That was so 20 minutes ago. Now government is able to “get something right like Medicare”. I see what you did there. Make a joke, tell a lie. Hopefully, when you’re done talking, people will still be thinking about the joke and not notice the glaring contradiction you just made. It should be noted that the quote ends with “(Applause.)”. It looks like the plan worked.

Tags: ,

Abraham Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address

Sep 10

Posted by robparis in General | No Comments

Select quotes and commentary from Abraham Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address

Monday, March 4, 1861

QUOTE
Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that— “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so“.

COMMENTARY
Lincoln directly states that he has neither the lawful right nor inclination to interfere with the institution of slavery (in states where it already exists). Lincoln’s opinions about slavery were well documented as he frequently made it a key point in his speeches. In an attempt to appease the South, Lincoln made it clear that he would not free the slaves in slave-owning states. However, on September 22, 1862, 18 months after entering office, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, declaring that slaves in any state of the Confederacy, that did not rejoin the Union by January 1, 1863 would become free. The Emancipation Proclamation made no claim on states that were currently in the Union. Instead of freeing slaves in states where Lincoln had power, he declared that they become free only in states that he did not have any power.

Although Lincoln’s address states that he had, “no objection to its [the Corwin Amendment] being made express and irrevocable”, it was during his presidency that an amendment with an opposing viewpoint was passed. The proposed Corwin Amendment stated that, “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.” However, on December 6, 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which called for the abolishment of slavery and involuntary servitude was adopted. “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

QUOTE
Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read: “Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes“.

COMMENTARY
Lincoln denounces the lawless invasion by armed forces on any State or Territory. He goes on to show how strongly he believes this by saying, “no matter what pretext” and by calling an invasion “among the gravest of crimes”. Later in his inauguration speech, Lincoln goes on to say that,

QUOTE
In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.

COMMENTARY
Lincoln states that there is no need for bloodshed. However, soon after the states announced their succession, the South was invaded in the bloodiest war in United States’ history. A war in which 620,000 were killed, more casualties than the nation’s loss in all its other wars combined. Lincoln makes it a point that he will hold the property belonging to the Government. However, the Southern states, either as independent states, or as the Confederacy, are not the property of the federal Government.

QUOTE
Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was “to form a more perfect Union.”
But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.

It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.

COMMENTARY
Lincoln’s conclusion cannot be logically drawn from his premises.

  • one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was “to form a more perfect Union.”
  • if destruction of the Union… be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution
  • It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union

First, Lincoln’s second premise is not true. Lincoln’s view that the Union would be less perfect if certain states seceded his only his opinion. I’m sure Jefferson Davis and 9 million other Southerners would disagree.

Second, even if both of Lincoln’s premises were true, there is no logical progression to his conclusion. Because the Constitution was created to make a perfect Union, and succession would make the Union less perfect, does not mean that no State can leave the Union. This is failed logic.

QUOTE
If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might in a moral point of view justify revolution; certainly would if such right were a vital one. But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, guaranties and prohibitions, in the Constitution that controversies never arise concerning them.

COMMENTARY
This claim does not make sense. How can Lincoln state that the rights of minorities are so plain and that there are no controversies at a time when the controversy over a Constitutional right for a minority (the South) is so rampant?

The key points of Lincoln’s first inaugural address were nothing more than words. Lincoln failed to keep his promises to the American public. At the same time he greatly reduced the civil rights of both the North and the South. For this, he was rewarded a second term.

Tags: ,

Select quotes from Atlas Shrugged

Sep 8

Posted by robparis in General | 2 Comments

After a little re-reading, I’ve noticed another part of Atlas Shrugged that seems to be timely. Here are some quotes about a small-scale factory socializing, among other things, health care.

Atlas Shrugged – Part II – Chapter X

The plan was that everybody in the factory would work according to his ability, but would be paid according to his need.

…it wasn’t too clear, but nobody asked any questions. None of us knew just how the plan would work, but every one of us thought that the next fellow knew it. And if anybody had doubts, he felt guilty and kept his mouth shut—because they made it sound like anyone who’d oppose the plan was a child killer at heart and less than a human being. They told us that this plan would achieve a noble ideal.

When it’s all one pot, you can’t let any man decide what his own needs are, can you?

Well, anyway, it was decided that nobody had the right to judge his own need or ability. We voted on it.

In the old days, we used to celebrate if somebody had a baby, we used to chip in and help him out with the hospital bills, if he happened to be hard-pressed for the moment. Now, if a baby was born, we didn’t speak to the parents for weeks. Babies, to us, had become what locusts were to farmers. In the old days, we used to help a man if he had a bad illness in the family. Now—well, I’ll tell you about just one case. It was the mother of a man who had been with us for fifteen years. She was a kindly old lady, cheerful and wise, she knew us all by our first names and we all liked her—we used to like her. One day, she slipped on the cellar stairs and fell and broke her hip. We knew what that meant at her age. The staff doctor said that she’d have to be sent to a hospital in town, for expensive treatments that would take a long time. The old lady died the night before she was to leave for town. They never established the cause of death. No, I don’t know whether she was murdered. Nobody said that. Nobody would talk about it at all. All I know is that I—and that’s what I can’t forget!—I, too, had caught myself wishing that she would die. This—may God forgive us!—was the brotherhood, the security, the abundance that the plan was supposed to achieve for us!

Tags: ,

Baseline budgeting

Aug 31

Posted by robparis in General | No Comments

“The previous budget serves merely as a baseline; the only question in any given year is how much spending will increase. Once created, no spending program is ever eliminated. The cycle goes on and on, with different administrations and different people in Congress.” – Ron Paul

“I object strenuously to the term “baseline budget.” In Washington, this means that the previous year’s spending levels represent only a baseline starting point. Both parties accept that each new budget will spend more than the last, the only issue being how much more. If Republicans offer a budget that grows federal spending by 3%, while Democrats seek 6% growth, Republicans trumpet that they are the party of smaller government! But expanding the government slower than some would like is not the same as reducing it.” - Ron Paul

Tags: , ,

Thomas Jefferson on Religion

Aug 26

Posted by robparis in General | No Comments

Remember Thomas Jefferson?

“…that the impious presumption of legislature and ruler, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time: That to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.”*

I guess not.

Let’s sit back down while our sinful and tyrannical leaders do what’s best for us. /s

* for the rest of the text, see here.

Tags: , , ,

House passes climate-change bill

Jun 27

Posted by robparis in General | No Comments

Government.

My favorite quotes from this article involve…

Scare tactics.

“Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio countered that, without the bill, the United States would remain energy-dependent on people who want to “fly planes into our buildings.”


Filibusters.

That wasn’t good enough for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), who delayed the roll call vote by reading page-by-page through a 300-page managers’ amendment Democrats added at around 3 a.m. Friday. Boehner seemed to relish the hour-long stunt, picking out the bill’s most obscure language and then pontificating about what it might – or might not – mean. Republicans laughed along with him and roared with applause when he was done.


Nothing to read.

“Republicans accused the Democrats of ramming the bill through the House. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), managing the debate for his party, asked repeatedly if there was even a copy of the current version of the bill anywhere in the House chamber. Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher – sitting in the speaker’s chair although she’s already been confirmed as Obama’s undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security — repeatedly dodged the question.


If you want to read, you can’t vote.

“Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the bill’s sponsors, finally rose to say that a single copy of the current version of the bill was available at the speaker’s desk – and on the Internet, which members would have to leave the floor to access.”


Poor planning and games.

“Even as the House raced toward a Fourth of July recess, Republicans unwittingly gave Democrats more time to whip their members Friday by calling for a series of amendments to an unrelated spending bill. When the Republicans realized what was happening, they quickly tried to withdraw the amendments, but the Democrats wouldn’t let them.”


Chocolate bribes.

“Pelosi plied undecided members with chocolate-covered Dove bars in a series of small group meetings. White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel worked the phones, and administration officials whipped members at a White House luau Thursday night.”

If you want to laugh, read the original article…

Tags: , ,