Re: ATTENTION: All you liberals...
Re: ATTENTION: All you liberals...
Hmm...My definition of fascism...from Merriam Webster:<br /><br />1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition<br /><br />------------<br /><br />You sure can draw parallels between this and the Conservatives just as easily as you can draw parallels between "liberals" and socialists.<br /><br />Centralized government? How bout the entire conservative movement reading from virtually the same script all of the time, with presidential and conservative attacks on the press, especially in Iraq, on an almost constant basis.<br /><br />Severe economic regimentation? Read tax cuts for the wealthy...End of the estate tax...etc. etc.<br /><br />Suppresion of the opposition? Read "Dixie Chicks"<br />Or Rummy and many others saying those that question the US policy are not patriotic.<br />Or the big sellers in the conservative book world this year:<br /><br />Treason---Ann Coulter<br />Shut up and sing---Laura Ingraham<br /><br />All with the treatise that we need to shut up dissenters...<br /><br />Re: Health Care--I did not even offer a personal positition of my own--only the fact that some sort of health care seems to be a given, and the argument is not over whether we need it, but what form it takes.<br />Hillary was charged with coming up with a plan for universal health care for all citizens--which is what she did. We don't really know if that is the plan she favors or not.<br />I haved lived in Canada as well as the US, and know that there are flaws in the Canadian system of universal health care for sure. No doubt no system is perfect. I think you will find out that the majority that argue we don't need health care either are covered now, or on welfare and already covered anyway.<br /><br />But the point is there are extremes on either side of this issue. We have already seen one argue that since the founding fathers did not address health care, we should not have it. Since it has only been in the last century or so when a person actually was better off seeking medical help than avoiding it, it is not totally surprising that no mention of it was made more than two centuries ago.<br /><br />Perhaps some would argue that we should have completely universal all access anytime free medical care on the other side...No one I know, and certainly not me, but perhaps there are some... <br /><br />It is where, in my opinion, the Canadian system falls short. There should be catastrophic coverage for all Americans, IMHO, with a deductible co-pay up to a certain level--perhaps depending on ability to pay...and there should be an incentive to stay healthy and refrain from getting medical help for any little sniffle--<br /><br />But there is of course room for argument and debate in this---but we do live in a society and there are certain things that are done in a civilized society that makes it a civilized society, IMHO.
