Again! It’s The Wrong Damned Argument.

In recent responses to me from my congressional representative regarding the matter of the nationalization of the medical industry by Barack Obama and his forces the following three assumptions were made:

1. "Congress must address these problems in order to provide affordable and accessible health care to all Americans."

2. "The health care delivery system in the United States is in need of reform."

3. "Any health care reform package Congress considers should empower Americans with opportunity and provide Americans the ability to make unencumbered decisions about their course of care. Achieving this positive type of change will only be possible by embracing – in a bipartisan manner – a fundamental rethinking of our health care delivery system – into a system which champions personal ownership and coverage."

All three positions or statements are false.

It is not true that Congress must address these problems in order to provide affordable and accessible health care to all Americans.

Neither is it true that the health care delivery system in the United States is in need of reform.

Nor is there any veracity or factual content in stating that a "...positive type of change will only be possible by embracing - in a bipartisan manner - a fundamental rethinking of our health care delivery system . . ." presumably by the Congress.

These are the wrong arguments. The United States has the finest medical care system in the entire world. Our doctors, our hospitals, our pharmaceutical companies, our design engineers and equipment innovators, our nurses and administrative staffs are the best there is anywhere. People come from all over the world to be treated in the United States.

We may have a pricing problem. But it was not brought about by the medical practitioners. It was not brought about by any failure of government to intervene in the very private matter of personal health issues.

There are persons and organizations who bear the responsibility of the current state of medical costs. And the U.S. government leads the list of offenders by not keeping its nose out of a matter which should and must be left in the hands of the people acting privately in their own best interests. It is no business of government to regulate medicine, to operate hospitals, to employ and supervise doctors and nurses or to set and maintain prices for medical services, supplies, facilities or equipment.

The vote in the U.S. House of Representatives should be Nay to any government control of the nation’s health care delivery services. The vote should be against any interference by government in the rendering of medical care to the nation’s citizens. And members of the House of Representatives should acknowledge their absence of powers in this respect and cease and desist from passing laws regulating, interfering with, appropriating funds for or nationalizing hospitals, clinics, ambulance services, laboratories, factories and any other portion or element of the health care sector of our country and vote accordingly.

In my letter to my congressional representative I said, "I have not proposed solutions because we face no medical problem to solve. When you are prepared to discuss the real problems and effective solutions to those problems, please let me know. I will be glad to discuss them with you. In the meantime, know that you are using the wrong argument. As long as you do so, you are destined to lose. Pay attention. The problem is financial and political not medical."

Nationalized health care is but another of Obama’s tools in taking over the United States of America for his own ill-conceived plans and faulty solutions designed to take America in the direction which best suits his personal desires and needs. "Tell Speaker Pelosi that America belongs to the citizens. It is not her private toy."

The problem in the U.S. Senate is different only in the names of its players and the margin of power held by the Democrat party. Reid replaces Pelosi and they have a narrower margin of power. Otherwise, the two houses are very similar in the fealty they show to Obama and the dedication they exhibit in carrying out his orders and/or fulfilling his wishes, as the case may be.

My Senators, too, argue the same falacious arguments. They say that it is about how much money will be spent on medical care. They seem oblivious to the fact that we don’t need a government take-over of the delivery of medical services in America. They seem unaware that it is as Nancy Reagan used to tell us about illegal drug use. She said, "Just say no." That is what the senators should be saying to Senate Majority Leader Reid and to Barak Obama. "Just say no."

Say no, to any government take over of health care and medical delivery services in the United States for the simple reason that it is not within their grant of powers to so act. Add to that the ever growing list of reasons why such a program borders on stupidity as anyone unselfish enough to look at the overall problem can easily see, and you have great reason to say NO.

Where are the problems? Take a look at the courts. Take a look at the myriad of entitlement programs in place. Take a look at the immigration problem along with its offspring, chain migration. Take a look at the Trial Lawyers Association and the burgeoning load of liability law suits designed primarily for the purpose of enriching lawyers. Take a look at the silliness of the Class Action Lawsuit program. Who gets served? Who gets enriched? Follow the money and you will find that it is not the doctors or the hospitals or even pharmaceutical and equipment manufacturers which start the runup of prices. The genesis of the problem lies in the greedy desires of individuals and their attorneys who make it almost impossible for a doctor to practice medicine in the United States for the fear of losing everything the doctor has earned to the clap of a judge’s gavel and the pronouncement of a jury awarding money damages.

And that is not the bottom of the well. Our legal system changed when lawyers were allowed to advertise for clients. It changed when lawyers were allowed to illegally finance their clients’ lawsuits. It changed for the worse when filing a lawsuit against one’s neighbor became not only financially rewarding but fashionable as well.

Most modern problems in America stem from some foolish action on the part of government. Last fall we were told there was an imminent financial disaster that would wipe out our savings and place all of us on the unemployment rolls. It was said that government must act. Many of us screamed NO, that what was needed was for the government to do nothing. For government to stay out of it.

Well the government didn’t stay out of it. They acted. And then acted again and again. Now millions of us have lost our savings and millions of us have been moved to the unemployment rolls. Now with millions poorer and millions out of work – with most of our former greatness in manufacturing prowess shipped overseas – with the U.S. federal government now owning the greatest automobile manufacturing company in history, with a foreign nation owning one of oldest and most respected car makers – the government now wants to take over health care.

And what are our law makers talking about? Not whether the government should run the health care delivery system, but how they should run it. Again! It’s The Wrong Damned Argument.

You remember when the national argument was about Bill Clinton having oral sex with a young female intern in the oval Office? Well, it wasn’t about sex. If it had only been about sex, most men, especially young men, would have congratulated the president and clapped each other on the back shouting, "Way to go, Bill!" Getting the ‘o’ in the Big "O" would have merited re-election. The argument was about perjury and obstruction of justice. It was about Slick Willy lying under oath and blocking a special prosecutor in his investigation and enforcement of the law.

And then when George W. Bush was president we were told constantly that the national argument was about the need for immigration reform and poor people putting food on the table when in fact the argument was about mass amnesty for millions of foreign nationals who had invaded our country and were living here illegally. It was and still is an argument about Democrats, RINOs and other liberals raking up another twenty million votes for the future.

We were then told that the banks were broke and the automobile manufacturers were facing bankruptcy. The argument became one of whether the government should let them go under or bail them out immediately and let them file for bankruptcy later on. It wasn’t about the banks or the auto companies going broke. It was about the government nationalizing the financial institutions of the nation and the last remaining vestiges of our great industrial prowess.

And now, we argue on television, on radio, on the internet and in person about national health care. Once again, that’s the wrong argument. The national argument should now be about Barack Obama usurping the power of the states and of the people in order to take complete control of our lives, our property and our very souls in the name of the immediate need for national government provided health care for everyone. Arguing about health insurance is a waste of time. It’s like arguing about how many people don’t have Cadillacs and have to rely on a crummy little Chevrolet to get around.

Once again it is the wrong argument yet we waste most of our time talking it to death. And of course the goal is to make all of us so sick of the discussion that we will accept the brain washing and support Obama in his last drive to become the permanent leader of what used to be the United States of America.

First of all, it is not about health care. It is about government provided health care. It is not about health insurance. It is about government provided health insurance. It is not about 40 million Americans who do not have adequate health insurance. It is about adding those not now covered by Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Hospital provided medical services and those who simply don’t want to buy health insurance for whatever reason. Maybe they have just lost one job and will be getting another, at which time their medical will either transfer or start with a new company. Maybe they are just healthy and don’t want to waste the money on an insurance policy since their current medical expenses are comfortably manageable without it. Maybe they are just rich and want to pay their own way. It is about forcing Americans into a health care system most don't want and few will benefit from.

Whatever it is, the argument should be about stopping the government from shoving an unwanted, irresponsible, overly expensive change in the way we pay for medical services down our throats. Maybe it is just an argument about whether Americans are ready for utter tyranny and a dictator who talks as though America is already his own private property.