RabidAnglophile's Blog

So Mr. Daschle has been appointed to be the incoming Secretary of Health & Human Services and was applauded as being "one of America's foremost health care experts".   This man does not have a medical degree, but a degree in political science and oh, yeah, he wrote a book on health care in America.  Those are his qualifications as a health care expert?

He wants to create a Federal Health Board, modeled on the Federal Reserve, to manage the country's health policy.  We all know what a bang up job Greenspan did; especially at the end when he confessed he'd made a mistake in believing all those crooks in the banking/lending world might have some morals and not act so greedily, sending our economy into a tailspin.

Mr. Daschle has stopped short of saying we should have a U.K. style health system, but he does say that the U.S. "won't be able to make a significant dent in health care spending without getting into the nitty gritty of which treatments are the most clinically valuable and cost effective." 

He is a politician without medical training.  How can he tell any physician how to treat their patients and what tests are necessary?   What sort of outcomes will be good enough for Mr. Daschle for a 75 y/o patient with metastatic disease? Or a child with autism, cystic fibrosis, leukemia, bone cancer, etc?  Obviously, he knows more than the MDs who spent years and years obtaining their education. 

People, this will be a game of numbers.  With the "cost effective" attitude, why spend more dollars to treat a devastating disease when it would be more "cost effective" to treat lesser illnesses?  I may be going a bit far here, but it sounds like we just might as well get ready to put our sick and elderly out on the ice floes.  People who tout national health care with the words "cost effective" in relation to medical treatment scare me and they should scare you too.

Just wondering how I can decline the so-called rebate that most everyone thinks the government is giving us for "free".   Even when I thought it was a real rebate I didn't want it since it was going to be considered income and would be taxable.  (I had to pay tax on the last rebate here in the state of Missouri)   Now, it seems what this "stimulus" really turns out to be is a "loan" of our own  money via future income tax refunds.  The news report said that most of these "rebates" would be paid back through our refunds within the next 12 months.  My annual tax refund is around $250-$300 and I use this to help pay my KC earnings tax which my employer declines to take out of my check for me.  So if I get a "rebate" check for $600 the government, on next year's taxes, will take all my almost $300 refund and then I will also have to write a check for another $300 to the IRS?   NO THANKS!

Having to listen to Fox4 "report" that Ms. Spears had her car towed because she abandoned it due to a flat tire is beyond belief.  Is this really considered newsworthy?  I can't imagine one person (with brains) in your viewing area who gives a fig about this troubled, untalented little poptart.  It would be noteworthy had she left her two unfortunate children in the car and walked off.  Why you news readers give any credence to, or report on these lowlife, self-absorbed celebs boggles the mind.  Are you not embarassed at all to have to report this as "news"?  Same goes for the daily 'American Idol' results.  Because the program is carried on your station does not make it "news".  Oh, and before I hear I can always turn the channel; I do.  It's just sad I must do this in order to find intelligently reported news.

What is all the fuss about this movie and these books?  An Athiest wrote a book against Christianity and they made it into a movie.  It is just a MOVIE, folks, and the books are found in the bookstores under FICTION!  (Just like Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia!)  I don't necessarily like the politics of Alec Baldwin or Jane Fonda (just to name two), but I still enjoy watching them perform.  I plan to see the movie mainly because they did some filming at Christ Church/Tom Quad in Oxford, a place I dearly love.  I decided to read the books beforehand to see what the story was about.  As someone pointed out in another blog, the first book may have been the best although not great.  I don't think the author is that great a writer.  By the third book, the whole thing really made no sense, was hard to follow and I was bored to tears.  The books are weird beyond belief.  And, yes, I did understand what was going on; I understood that the author obviously hated anything to do with Christianity or a God/Creator.  (I always find it interesting that authors who write books like this, fiction or not, always seem to pounce on the doctrines of the Roman Catholic church and not the Methodist or Presbyterian church down the street.  Hmmm). 

Anyway, when I finished the books I still went to church and I still love God and I still pray everyday.  My faith is not so frail that three books of fiction by an athiest turned me to his point of view.  (Nor did reading the charming Harry Potter books make me or my niece and nephews ache to become witches and wizards so we could perform magic).  For you Christian parents out there who are shaking in their shoes at the thought their children might see the movie and want to read the books, perhaps you should take a good look at yourselves.  Have you been so lax in their Christian upbringing that you think they will read these books or see the movie and think they would start to hate God?  Or, is it because you may not have unshakeable faith yourself, or perhaps have not quite set a good example to your children?  An intelligent parent and an intelligent child will not be duped by a movie or a book.  And, perhaps it is not wise to shield your children from everything.  Let them be prepared enough to deal with life.  What is that old saying?   ".........better the devil you know than the one you don't?"