That’s Right Nate

It was thirty years ago, when the United States Olympic Hockey Team inspired by the fiery speeches of new President Ronald Reagan stunned the world and struck a blow against the iron curtain by defeating the Soviet Union and their allies the Fins to win the 1980 gold medal at Lake Placid.

This year, the great threat to our liberty comes not from Soviet style communism, but from Canadian style health care.  With America’s hockey mom Sarah Palin providing the inspiration through her timely tweet, “YES!!! USA. 5-3 with 44 seconds to go… YES AMERICA!!! Sweeeeeet…”   I believe they heard her twitter account all the way to the Ottawa where it sounded like the voice of liberty crying out in the night, “Prime Minister Harper tear down your health care system.”

The game itself was a grueling affair with end to end action.  Though Canada tied it twice, the Americans never trailed.   They never backed down from any challenges as if they knew that even if they were checked hard and injured, they would not have to wait for days in a state run hospital.  Maybe they were simply healthier from the many breakthroughs in sports medicine perfected under our health care system.

The Americans have the youngest team in the Olympics while the Canadians consider to frantically look for a linemate to pair with superstars Sidney Crosby and Rick Nash.   The obvious answer here is somebody named Stills.  The Canadians aren’t eliminated by any stretch of the imagination, but the question remains–will they be too sickly to climb up to the podium if they do medal.

As you know, Congressman Jack Kimble (R-CA) has been an occasional contributor to my blog.   He’s been very outspoken on Twitter(@RepJackKimble) lately about health care reform and the dangers of a Canadian style socialized medicine.   I was lucky enough to be able to arrange a phone interview with Congressman Kimble about this subject that is very important to both of us.

Nate: Thank you for agreeing to this interview congressman.   I think your contributions to the blog have really helped give me legitimacy as a blog.

Kimble: Thank you Nate.  I’m always happy to talk to the media and with C-Span playing favorites, I’ve had a hard time getting my message out to the people of this United States and to the soldiers who keep this great land of ours safe also.

Nate: Yes, I too would like to say, “support our troops”.

Kimble: Thank you for doing that Nate.  It means a lot to me.

Nate: Now, you have some serious problems with Canadian health care I know.   I do too.   I dated a very beautiful Canadian girl who lived in Canada throughout high school and college.   She was pretty enough to be a model and in fact did do some wallet and picture frame work.  She was extremely into me and we tried to make the long distance thing work, but I finally had to break up with her because of Canadian health care.

Kimble: Why would you break up with a girl you obviously liked over Canadian health care.

Nate: The problem was every time she’d be coming down to visit me and meet my friends, she’d undoubtedly come down with something and have to cancel at the last moment.   It made me look very bad to my friends and that put a terrible strain on my relationship.

Kimble: Actually, that’s not an uncommon story.   Especially with attractive young Canadian women and some men.

Nate: I’m going to have to play Obama…I mean devil’s advocate here.

Kimble: :::laughing::: Nice one

Nate: What do you say to people who say that the Canadian health care system is much cheaper than the United States?

Kimble: That’s not quite true.   While Americans pay 16% of our GDP for health care, Canadians spend 10.1% of theirs.

Nate: So Canada’s system is considerably cheaper?

Kimble: Not exactly.  You see the life expectancy of an American is 77.1 years while in Canada the life expectancy is 80.7 years.   That’s 3 extra years of taxes that the average Canadian has to pay for their health care.  In the end it very much evens out.

Nate: I hadn’t thought of it that way.

Kimble: You should.  It’s not just doctors either.   Dentistry in Canada is affected too.  Watch an NHL game sometimes and look at how many of the Canadian players are missing teeth.

Nate: Wow, there are a lot.  You explanation of the cost imbalance makes a lot of sense, but anybody can present statistics.   Do you have any anecdotes to help support your case?

Kimble: Yes, I do.  There’s a very brave Canadian woman by the name of Shona Holmes.

Nate: The woman in the commercial with the terminal brain tumor?

Kimble: Actually, she made the brain tumor part up, but anyway at 31 years old she was diagnosed with a Rathke’s Cleft Cyst on her pituitary gland.

Nate: Wow! That sounds serious.

Kimble: It is.  A Rathke’s Cleft Cyst is a benign tumor that can cause dizziness and even blindness if it isn’t treated and the Canadians wanted her to wait a month for treatment so she paid $100,000 out of pocket to go to Arizona and get it removed.

Nate: She had to pay out of her own pocket, that’s terrible.   How do you explain that 85% of Canadians are happy with their healthcare system?

Kimble: Would you like the NFL to have 3 downs instead of 4?

Nate: No, of course not.

Kimble: Would you like to eat your french fries with brown gravy or vinegar?

Nate: Not if my life depended on it.

Kimble: How about the metric systme?

Nate: Oh heck no.

Kimble: The Canadians are happy with all of those things.

Nate: Wow, they really aren’t very bright.

Kimble: No they’re not.   They make great lumberjacks, defensemen, or mounties, but you sure wouldn’t want to ask one to do math.

Nate: Good point.   I know this may be a touchy topic, so you don’t have to answer this, but how do you respond to people who say that the big reason you’re so against socialized medicine is because insurance company lobbyists donate heavily to your campaign?

Kimble: I don’t mind answering.   Look, it takes a lot of money to run for office in this country.  I get a lot of money from insurance company lobbyists, but I always make it clear up front that it won’t affect my vote.  Some of the most despicable people on the planet contribute to my campaign–pay day loan guys, crack dealers, companies that knowingly make defective baby toys.   You think I am beholden to all those people?

Nate: Well no of course not, you’d never be reelected.

Kimble: Exactly Nate.

Nate: Thank you for agreeing to this interview congressman.

Kimble: Thank you Nate.  You asked some real tough questions.  I like that.

Canadian singer/songwriter Lullaby Baxter shows how to sport glasses and gloves in this song dedicated to the glories of heterosexual Christian suburban life.

A report released by the Canada West Foundation today indicates support for placing nuclear reactors in Sakatchewan and Alberta.  The Alberta government earlier this year appointed an expert panel to study nuclear power after Ontario-based Bruce Power proposed to build four 1,000-megawatt reactors on the shore of Lac Cardinal near Peace River.

The Canadian government insists that these reactors would be used for peaceful creation of energy, but their future under a regime hostile to the United States is unknown.  It is quite possible that these very same reactors could be used to enrich uranium and allow the Canadians to develop nuclear weapons.  If these reactors go live the United States must make it clear to the Canadians and the United Nations that this is unacceptable and demand unlimited inspections to verify that they are only being used for peaceful means as the Canadians claim.

This is not actually the third day of the crisis, but it is the third day since I knew about it and began blogging about it.  Americans automatically seem to assume that that next Canadian government will automatically be friendly to us.  I am sure that the Georgians felt the same way when Putin stepped down in Russia.

We cannot afford a wimpy Democratic administration that will be pushed around by a new hardline government in Ottawa.  What would happen if Canada demanded the Upper Peninsula?  There are currently seven disputed territories between the United States and Canada–The Machias Sea Island, North Rock, The Strait of Juan d Fuca, The Dixon Entrance, The Portland Canal, The Beaufort Sea, and the Northwest Passage.

The Canadians are already talking about taking their troops out of Afghanistan.  With us engaged in a long and protracted fight, is this their chance to strike at our soft underbelly.  Let’s vote McCain and hope we never find out.

The situation in Canada seems far more dangerous than I had realized.  I came across this website which seems to have been up since 1997 with the purpose of advocating militaristic domination of the United States and the Western Hemisphere by the Canadians.  Of course they could never succeed, but the fact they’re planning it shows just how much we need Sarah Palin at a time like this.

Because of our own election, people may have missed the parliamentary crisis in Canada.    Their prime minister has disolved the parliament and while early elections have been promised refugees are undoubtedly making their way North.  We have no idea what type of government Canada will take.  In a parlimanetary election the Prime Minister totally depends on which party gets the most votes.  There is no guarantee that Canada will not form a government hostile to the United States.  We have strong disagreements over a potential Northwest Passage uncovered by global warming.

A more hardline Canadian government will definitely start coming after us regarding fishing rights.  Of both campaigns, only Sarah Palin as governor of Alaska has experience negotiating fishight rights with a foreign government.   Furthermore, with potential hostilities with Canada around the corner only one candidate has any understanding of Canadian culture.  Governor Palin is not only a moose hunter, but a hockey mom and moose hunting and hockey represent about 90% of Canadian culture.

With a potentially hostile Canada on our Northern border, can we afford anybody, but Palin and McCain in the White House.  She did keep Alaska free from Russian domination as governor of Alaska.  She is the right person to lead us through this time of crisis.

Illegal immigration is a very tricky subject.  On the one hand, Illegal immigrants help keep the cost of doing business in the United States down.  On the other hand we have laws for a reason.

America is a great melting pot where people come from all over the world and give up their old cultures to become American.  However, if you think of it as a stew, Mexicans are one spice in the stew and lately the stew has beeen getting too spicy.  In our culture white anglo-saxon protestants are the meat and you don’t want the meat overpowered by the spice. 

The obvious solution is too build a large wall separating the United States from Mexico, but it is important that we build one to the North as well and too often that discussion is neglected.  Esitmates are that 6% of illegal immigrants in this country came in through Canada and if we build a wall to the South that number will escalate.  Not only will Mexicans try enterring through Canada, Canadians themselves in the worsening economy will attempt to head South to avoid their welfare state.  The extreme lines for medical care and the lack of quality care will send more and more Canadians to the United States as will their tax burden and their inferior government services.  Canadians are great, but like Mexicans they’re a spice.  If we don’t want this country overrun with beer drinking, hockey watching, lumberjack who are looking for more government help and higher tax rates we need to take action now and build a wall to the North as well.