That’s Right Nate

I am not a Catholic and I have often put down Papists because their beliefs in transubstantiation, the Pope, as well as their use of idols and statues dooms them to eternal damnation.   However, I have always enjoyed the papists’ belief in a top down authority based religion.   Catholics always knew where they stood because the Pope set policy and all the Catholics followed the company line–kind of like Dick Cheney in the Bush White House.

Nowadays, the Catholic church seems very diverse and espousing contradictory edicts at the same time.  The Pope has not condemned an attempt to make homosexuality in Uganda a capital crime and a Catholic school in Mississippi just canceled their prom over fears that a lesbian couple might attend.  The obvious way to read this is that the Catholic church remains steadfastly against gays.   Unfortunately, the whole matter is clouded by the revelation of gay sex at the Vatican.  According to the Guardian,  “Angelo Balducci, a Gentleman of His Holiness, was caught by police on a wiretap allegedly negotiating with Thomas Chinedu Ehiem, a 29-year-old Vatican chorister, over the specific physical details of men he wanted brought to him.”

The thing that’s really confusing is with the latest health care legislation.  After the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned Health Care legislation for making it easier for women to get an abortion, the Catholic Health Association, prominent Catholic theologians, and “60 leaders of religious orders representing 59,000 Catholic nuns” broke with the bishops and called for the passage of the Senate legislation.  Now ordinarily in a situation like this, the obvious choice is for the schism to lead to the formation of two churches.   However, the Catholics like other Italian organizations such as the mafia have never been very fond of allowing members to leave.

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops was quick to point out that the signatories don’t speak for all nuns.  After all there are over 68,000 nuns in the United States leading one to think that nearly 10,000 nuns agreed with the Bishops instead.   As the USCCB correctly points out, they don’t speak for every nun in the United States.  Then again, they are the leaders of the orders and nuns take a vow of obedience.  Like I said, it gets confusing.

I asked Congressman Jack Kimble (R-CA), himself a Catholic, to explain the Bishop’s objections and he did like this, “Last year, there were nearly 40,000 deaths caused by drunk driving.  You need only 3 things to drunk drive–a car, alcohol, and a road.  I have been opposing Obama’s stimulus packages because they encourage road building, which can be used to drive drunk.  The Catholic Bishops feel much the same way about health care.  Health care could make abortions more easily attainable so naturally they’re against them.”

I can see where the Catholics are coming from.   Even if 100 people have their lives saved because of access to health care, if one woman is able to use federal money to get an abortion it would not be right.  This is of course different than the views of the Catholic Chuch on their current sex scandals in Europe where they believe that a couple of hundred child abusers should be an indictment of the other priests in the country.

The only way to settle this out is for the Pope to decide what is and what isn’t Catholic dogma.  After all, he’s infallible when it comes to dogma.  Once he has that figured out, the Catholics need another inquisition so that orthodoxy can be maintained.   I only hope it happens before it’s too late.

A lot of people listen to Rush Limbaugh to find out the scary news of what’s going on in this country.  I don’t do that.   Glenn Beck is far scarier.   Instead, I listen to Rush Limbaugh for inspiration.  His 20+ year battle against the liberal menace has inspired me countless times, but his show today made me proud to be an American.  When asked what he would do if Obama’s health care plan does pass, Limbaugh announced that he would move to Costa Rica.

At first, I was shocked at the loss of one of our national treasures, but the more I thought about it the more I understood Rush’s point.  As a radio talk show host, he’s forced to sit in a little studio for a good part of the day and he’s come to rely on a steady flow of prescription and non-prescription pain medication to get him through his day.   Any danger to that supply line is a danger to his livelihood and as such it makes sense to go to Costa Rica where his American dollars can keep him properly medicated.  It isn’t a question of patriotism as much as the right of Rush to earn a living.

I have been inspired by Rush myself.   I find myself getting a bit peckish for a Xanax from time to time and in the event Obama’s health care passes, I could risk a long wait for my Xanax as well as for my Nembutal, Mebaral, Valium, Librium, Tranxene, Halcion, BuSpar, and Horse Tranquilizer needs.  Following Rush’s example I started to look for a place to move to and desiring a warm climate and other white people.  I think I could be quite happy living in Guam and I will publicly go on record as saying in Obama’s Health Care passes, I will be leaving this country and moving to Guam instead.   I hope it doesn’t come to that.

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.

I am so proud of my fellow gun owners for their united opposition to Obama’s health care proposals.   The Gun Owners of America group recently warned it’s 300,000 members that if the health care bill passes, the government could declare citizens medically unfit to carry a gun.   This is the same thing Hitler and the communists did, when we take away the rights of the mentally unbalanced to own firearms simply because they may have issues with rage or paranoia or may pose a threat to themselves or others, we lose our second amendment rights.   Executive Director of the group Larry Pratt called for resistance saying, “you end up having a gazillion people lose their gun rights because of some medical record that someone doesn’t like, where they say, ‘Oh, that might be a danger to their self or others.”

I cannot abide having these hard earned rights taken away from my fellow countrymen simply because they’re mentally unbalanced.   President James A. Garfield gave his life protecting the rights of the mentally unhinged to own firearms.   He was fatally shot by Charles Guiteau on July 2, 1881 when his assassin decided that God had commanded him to kill the ungrateful president who refused to hire him.   There are hundreds of thousands of people like me inspired by Garfield’s sacrifice who will not let it be in vain by taking away gun rights for the criminally insane.

The other reason that gun owners like myself oppose any kind of health care reform is because as private citizens we have to pay for not only a gun, but also for ammunition for that gun.  If we shoot somebody, it hardly seems fair that our tax dollars also pay to treat them for that gun shot wound.  In fact, since the reason you shoot somebody is to do harm to them, many of us would just as soon that the person we shoot not be able to get medical care in the first place.

Unfortunately, since the days of the Old West, medicine has improved greatly.   In those days, a belly shot was almost a sure death sentence.  Today, doctor’s are able to do a remarkable number of things to treat gun shot wounds and unfortunately, gun manufacturers have simply not kept up, especially in the area of causing infection.   This is definitely a call for both gun and ammunition manufacturers to step up their games.   If all gun shot wounds can be easily treated, do we really have the right to bear arms.

[From Congressman Kimble's webpage]

As you know, the Senate is voting on Health Care this coming Saturday. It is very urgent that we stand up to the Obama/Pelosi agenda to take over health care in this country, but we can’t do this without your help. The vote will be televised live in prime time and as we saw during our vote in the House, the sight of a member of congress holding a small child to argue against health care is a very powerful image. Unfortunately, we have a shortage of small children. What we are looking for is cute children, preferably between ages 2-4 who are potty trained and not criers. Please, no ugly children–they just won’t be as effective on camera. We will return your baby safe and sound after the vote. If you have a baby please either phone 202 863-8500 or email Leadership@rnc.org. Please put Cute Baby Available in the Subject line.

In what can only be called a national tragedy, the Democrats were able to pass a health care bill through the House of Representatives yesterday, despite the impassioned pleas of 99.9% of the congressional Republicans.   The move will no longer allow insurance companies to deny coverage to people with expensive pre-existing conditions like cancer, heart disease, or rape.   The program will also create a government created insurance plan referred to as the public option.

House Republican Leader John Boehner decried the bill stating, “Americans want a common-sense approach to healthcare reform, not Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 2,032-page government takeover that increases costs, adds to our skyrocketing debt, destroys jobs with tax hikes and new mandates, and cuts seniors’ Medicare benefits.”

Friend of this blog, Congressman Jack Kimble (R-CA) said, “This just makes coming into work on a Saturday that much harder, especially during college football season.   I’m worried that I’ll have to give up my congressional health care now.”

The raucous debate over health care began earlier in the morning, when 83 year old bully John Dingle, using the same gavel he had used to help shove medicare down our country’s throat,  badgered Republicans who tried to interrupt the Democratic Women’s Caucus from speaking.  Anybody who has ever been married can tell you how hard it is to get a word in edgewise with a woman even without your crazy old grandpa banging his gavel everytime you try to speak.

What made matters especially troubling for some Republicans was the defection of Joseph Cao (R-LA) who was the sole Republican to vote with the Democrats in their 220-215 victory.  “Now I understand how our brave men felt at Pearl Harbor,” said Kimble referring to Chao’s betrayal, “He ninjaed us.”

The health care battle now moves onto the Senate, where things don not look good for the Democrats.    Cao may be a Republican, but he obviously felt some pressure representing a very liberal city like Los Angeles.   The Senators represent states, not districts and are less vulnerable to that kind of pressure.  Joe Lieberman (?-CT) has already said the he will not let a bill with a public option come to a vote in the Senate.

[We're very lucky tonight to have a guest column by Congressman Jack Kimble (R-CA) who is writing in praise of Senator Joe Lieberman (?-CN)]

I happen to be a great fan of Joe Lieberman.  I took some heat for this in 2000 when he was brainwashed by Al Gore and ran against our beloved President Bush.  I have to admit, I could even feel empathy for the many Democrats who were crestfallen at the thought of Joe being denied the Vice-Presidency in such a close election.    I’ve been a big fan of Joe Lieberman for nearly 20 years since he first won my heart as Willie on the television show Alf.  His deadpan, put upon, whining delivery has served him well as a Senator as well.

Though Joe is older now, I can attest that he looks like a man half his age in a spedo.  He’s living proof that with good living, you really don’t need health care.   Today, he took a lot of flack from his own party, or former party, or whatever the Democrats are when he announced he would not vote for a health care bill with the public option and in fact he wouldn’t even vote to end a filibuster unless the public option was removed from the legislation.

Joe’s problems with the public option is the same as my own:

1. The government cannot handle things like this efficiently and it would do a terrible job insuring people.
2. The public option will increase competition and lower the profit margins of insurance companies at a time when they can least afford it.
3. The public option will lead to communism by 2012.

Joe has said that he would to keep the rest of the bill and in 3 or 4 years revisit things to see if we might want to investigate the possibility of creating a trigger that if reached would possibly bring us the public option.   Without the public option, the current program will work to lower health care costs and insure people by fining people heavily if they don’t buy health insurance   This will help the insurance companies by increasing their profits and help the uninsured by making them by health care.

Joe has once again shown himself to be a figure of integrity and courage.  A lot of people would have been scared to stand against the public option when like Lieberman, they were so heavily financed by the insurance industry.   I had the same problem just last year when I had to make the difficult decision of supporting the tobacco industry despite the fact that they heavily funded my campaign.  I made the right choice and went with my conscience the same way that Joe Lieberman has today.  This is truly what being a member of Congress is all about.

In my mind, I’ve been wrestling for sometime now with how to find an American alternative to the socialist public option health care that President Obama wants to force on us.  Thanks to bold and courageous Americans like Bill and Chelsea Caudle, I think I’ve found a solution.

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Bill worked for a plastics company before getting laid off from the job he had held for the past 20 years.   Unfortunately, his wife Chelsea was diagnosed with ovarian cancer.   At age 40, the family faced some tough choices.   With 3 children, one as young as 14 years old, the Caudles faced mounting medical bills and Bill knew what he had to do.  He enlisted in the United States Army.   As soon as he was processed at Fort Knox in Kentucky, Chelsea was able to start chemotherapy.  Bill had paved a way for patriotic Americans to get health care while saying “no” to socialism.

By joining the military, millions of uninsured in this country can be covered and at the same time we can preserve insurance company profits, which are so important to our nation’s economy.  It is estimated that there are over 45,000,000 uninsured in this country.   If only 5% of those people would join the military, that would give us another 2.25 million soldiers—that’s more than enough for our commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Colombia, Pakistan, Iran, and North Korea.  Heck, that’s enough for us to invade Iceland for no apparent reason and still meet our commitments.   Best of all, with 45,000 dying every year from lack of insurance, the American public could stomach a very high casualty rate, knowing that a lot of the soldiers would have died anyway.

The ancient Romans guarded citizenship in a way that Americans should envy.   You couldn’t just become a Roman citizen.  One route to citizenship was joining the military.   Should we not guard our health care just as preciously?

How would you feel if you owned a TGI Fridays and the Applebees down the street started giving out free food?   That’s how America’s doctors and insurance companies must feel now that there is an explosion of these free clinics.  And who are these culprits who are trying to bring down the free market?  They’re the usual suspects–the people who hate this country and are using sick people to try and bring it down.

The National Association of Free Clinics is being promoted by such pinkos as Keith Olbermann and Oprah’s Dr. Oz and funded by Americans just like you.   The problem is that free health care will always draw those who are “unable to pay”.   You know why they’re unable to pay?   Because there is free health care.   Anyone who has ever had their parents postpone a vacation to the Grand Cayman Resort so that they could get braces, knows that people can afford health care if they’re motivated.  The problem is these well meaning liberals sap the motivation by giving it away for free.

Doctors who work these clinics are the lowest form of scabs.  They choose to feel good about themselves and by doing so hurt the business of other doctors.   And what about the insurance companies?  Why buy insurance if you simply have to wait for a free health cinic to come to your city.  If America is serious about health care, the first thing we need to do is shut down these clinics.   There can be no free lunch in America or if there is, there should be no free Heimlich Maneuver for choking victims.