Join us on Facebook!Follow us on Twitter!

Not With My Bones They Won’t PDF Print E-mail
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000194 EndHTML:0000003572 StartFragment:0000002377 EndFragment:0000003536 SourceURL:file://localhost/Volumes/SERVER/EDITORIAL/1-11-11/COLUMNS/Ruralviewpoints.doc @font-face { font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }table.MsoNormalTable { font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

The Obama administration’s effort to withhold medical care from seniors citizens is nothing new. The same suggestions arose during the last half of the Bush administration. Both groups have insisted that doctors counsel with the elderly who have reached 75 and advise them that from that point on their health would be downhill. Pardon me, I was taught in college that when one reaches 25 his body begins to slowly deteriorate. Of course, what godless politicians want is to withhold medical care from who have reached 75 or else persuade them to ask for a “money shot.” They are doing this in the name of saving money. One trillion is washed on the stimulus package, plunging America further in debt, and now to reduce the debt they want to rob senior citizens of health care. This is Jessie James in reverse order- robbing the poor and giving to the rich- the like of which is the ugly duckling from California. This is what takes the cake- reduce the money spent on medicare and we “can build a stronger America,” so pagans begin in D.C. advocate. Not on my bones they won’t, I’ll let god make that decision for me.

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000194 EndHTML:0000004125 StartFragment:0000002379 EndFragment:0000004089 SourceURL:file://localhost/Volumes/SERVER/EDITORIAL/1-11-11/COLUMNS/Ruralviewpoints.doc @font-face { font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }table.MsoNormalTable { font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

Defining Socialism

The best definition of socialism that I have ever read appears below. I don’t know who is responsible for this definition, but I wanted to share it with my readers. An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed and entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich--- a great ‘equalizer.’

The professor said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grades so no one will fail, and no one will receive an A.” after the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. the students who studies hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied less, and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too, so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the third test rolled around the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings… and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that the socialism would also ultimately fail. Why? Because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great—but when government takes all the reward away…. No one will try or want to succeed.

Couldn’t be a much simpler illustration…….

 

Trending - Most Popular

Blogs