OT, but have you seen it yet? It's really good. It's worth it to see it 3D Imax. Green ghosts withstanding, it is the single most accurate version to Dickens' book I've seen.
I haven't...big plans to go see it with the family the Saturday after Thanksgiving. I have to confess, I have trouble believing any version can ever top A Muppet Christmas Carol, lol. Even though it's silly, I think Michael Caine is the best Scrooge. And...Muppets!
There... is not a thing you wrote that I didn't agree with!
LOL Shocked much? ;)
I hope their missing presence here didn't lead you to believe that I'm in favor of Washington's current plans, though!
Not for a second. ;)
I suppose the purpose of my post was to namely define that even if healthcare is a right, such a designiation doesn't equate to an entitlement. They use that as a bludgeon in debate: "But healthcare is a right!" To which we really need to be saying, "Yes, and... This means government handout how?" Instead, people backtrack all over themselves, avoiding the quesion while attempting to still mantain that they are, in fact, very compassionate people.
YES. Which is really why your post resonated so much with me -- neither side of the debate is entirely wrong, they're just failing to communicate the crux of the problem. One wonders if anyone has actually ever posed the question, "Why should the government pick up the slack here?"
I would say more by evolution than design, though the Founders' blueprint certainly had its weak points that both parties have exploited. If we were still following the intent of Constitution, - to restrain the government and not the people, - there'd be a whole lot less bureaucracy, spending, and waste.
Oh yes, I completely agree. I meant more in the sense that the Constitution intended to set up so many checks and balances that one party or the other couldn't easily make sweeping changes to the Federal government -- that kind of inefficiency. But I guess thankfully since the Federal government is now too powerful, Congress has just descended into chaos so no one can get a bloody thing passed now, lol.
That's a very cool story about old Grover! Thanks for sharing. I certainly can't fault the democrats for their compassion -- and I do lean more toward the bleeding heart side of issues myself -- but you can't govern based on emotion, can you?
no subject
I haven't...big plans to go see it with the family the Saturday after Thanksgiving. I have to confess, I have trouble believing any version can ever top A Muppet Christmas Carol, lol. Even though it's silly, I think Michael Caine is the best Scrooge. And...Muppets!
There... is not a thing you wrote that I didn't agree with!
LOL Shocked much? ;)
I hope their missing presence here didn't lead you to believe that I'm in favor of Washington's current plans, though!
Not for a second. ;)
I suppose the purpose of my post was to namely define that even if healthcare is a right, such a designiation doesn't equate to an entitlement. They use that as a bludgeon in debate: "But healthcare is a right!" To which we really need to be saying, "Yes, and... This means government handout how?" Instead, people backtrack all over themselves, avoiding the quesion while attempting to still mantain that they are, in fact, very compassionate people.
YES. Which is really why your post resonated so much with me -- neither side of the debate is entirely wrong, they're just failing to communicate the crux of the problem. One wonders if anyone has actually ever posed the question, "Why should the government pick up the slack here?"
I would say more by evolution than design, though the Founders' blueprint certainly had its weak points that both parties have exploited. If we were still following the intent of Constitution, - to restrain the government and not the people, - there'd be a whole lot less bureaucracy, spending, and waste.
Oh yes, I completely agree. I meant more in the sense that the Constitution intended to set up so many checks and balances that one party or the other couldn't easily make sweeping changes to the Federal government -- that kind of inefficiency. But I guess thankfully since the Federal government is now too powerful, Congress has just descended into chaos so no one can get a bloody thing passed now, lol.
That's a very cool story about old Grover! Thanks for sharing. I certainly can't fault the democrats for their compassion -- and I do lean more toward the bleeding heart side of issues myself -- but you can't govern based on emotion, can you?