Rights Misunderstanding

Posted Thursday, December 10, 2009, at 12:55 PM
View 6 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • *

    Rather than a dry explanation of how you believe the Bill of Rights should be interpreted, (I guess thats how I read this blog); why not simply demand people specify then dispute those claims. I don't know how numbingly loud the cry is, I don't hear it nor do I pay attention to it. Those misguided fools who will shout won't listen, and anyone with reason would do as I do (hopefully). Really the only specific thing I hear people complain rights wise is that Obama is going to take guns away. Although I believe he may wish to do so, it will never happen so I don't see why people get all up in arms (pun intended) about it.

    Let me be the first to call you a Lyre and Un-Armenian.

    I can't wait until you lambaste the Democrats over the public option. From what I've seen it is the only aspect of the supposed reform that people genuinely want. Stands to reason that it would be the first thing cut by politicians. From what I've gathered there is more support for a generalized public option than there is for either of the specific plans proposed by Congress.

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 3:12 PM
  • *

    It was dry? My apologies (Yes I am being sincere).

    You do make a valid point how the more popular programs that are being proposed are usually the first to get booted.

    Oh and thanks for not letting me down and calling me a liar and un-Armenian

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 5:09 PM
  • I'm not yet convinced that the system is broken enough to warrent a public option. There's things that need fixed with in the insurance industry yes, but I don't think a public option will fix them.

    I'm in much bigger support of non-profit insurance co-ops.

    I think the insurance industry and government need to get together and talk about what needs fixed and how to solve them.

    One thing I think needs stopped is that insurance companies can hide behind the guise of "Expirmental proceedure". The only way a procedure becomes non-expirmental is by doing it. However, I also think that the medical field should help with the cost. After all, they gain more knowledge from doing a procedure then an insurance company loses in money.

    It'd also be nice to see insurance costs come down. But, also I feel Americans have to change some habits and it shouldn't be just on the insurance companies to do this. However, they can also put programs in place that encourage proper habits.

    Health care isn't a one way street. I think the public option currently is a rather large band-aid and will not solve the underlying problems in a beneficial way, instead, it will only cover up the problems at a higher cost then fixing them.

    -- Posted by npwinder on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 5:54 PM
  • Mike,

    The broad strokes in which our Constitution was framed came from the sheer genius of men such as Franklin, Jefferson, Adams and all the others who created our nation's foundation.

    With the Bill of Rights, they completed their work with a brilliant document.

    Yes, they ducked the slavery issue, and guaranteed local and state governments the right to raise and arm militias. [Naturally the NRA insists that protects drug gangs' possession of assault rifles and automatic pistols.]

    I'm sure the families of those four Seattle area cops appreciate the NRA's efforts in that regard.

    What amazes me is the anger and hatred being expressed regarding Health Care Reform.

    Without Reform NOW -- this country will be devoting one fourth of our Gross National Product to supporting health care within the next two years.

    There are constant attacks regarding the numbers of uninsured people in the U.S.

    High end -- 40-Million.

    Low end -- 25-Million.

    Can anyone doubt that having 100,000 Americans without access to health care is unacceptable?

    The same people who accuse those "criminal liberals" of hating America, have no problem with millions of Americans impoverished so Chinese workers can slave for $1.00 to $3.00 for a 14 hour day.

    I spend most early Saturday mornings and many Friday mornings at Garage Sales - where I find near new and new U.S. made products being sold by formerly affluent widows, widowers, couples and even some families. Last week I paid the sellers' price [$70], and loaded the pickup with about $800 in quality goods that I and people I know can use to good effect.

    Not one piece of Chinese plastic junk. Quality hardwood, leather, metal U.S. made products, most new and in the original packaging.

    I saved more than $700 for quality items which are in use right now.

    Not one dime of my spending left the county or ended up in China.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Sat, Dec 12, 2009, at 7:32 PM
  • Mike

    Clear and concise summary of what is--thanks.

    Insurance, having served on my employers insurance committee from 1997-2007, insurance rates increased by double digits every year and at least one year during that period the increase was almost 23%! And participants copays went from zero to $25 per visit or prescription.

    Insurance companies have proven over time they are incapable of self regulation--the Hillary scare of the early 90's didn't wake them up.

    If only reform had occurred in the 90's.

    -- Posted by ontheleftcoast on Sun, Dec 13, 2009, at 1:04 AM
  • *

    Whether or not the founding father's meant for the Bill of Rights to be broadly read depends on your ideology and which Amendment is. For people such as myself the 2nd Amendment is pretty clear that gun rights was strictly meant for states' militias. For gun rights people the 2nd Amendment is pretty clear that it is meant for all people.

    On the religion part people such as myself see it pretty clear that it is setting up a clear wall between the state (government) and religion so that a national religion could not be established. For others it's not quite that clear.

    That's partly why the Constitution is called a living document not just because it can be changed but because it can be interpreted many different ways.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sun, Dec 13, 2009, at 1:51 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: