Heath Shuler Post for Septmeber 15

Or, When Google comes a knockin'

An anonymous Googler left me a present today. This person was Googling for information on a local race I posted about sometime ago, and I looked at the results of their search and found some information on a current race, the local Congressional Race.

So off I went, reading the AARP Survey designed to assist voters in making a decision in Novewmber. So, without further ado, here is the survey with my frequent interuptions to clarify, translate, and point out what I feel are gross errors.

The survey questions are in Black, AARP Responses are in a gray color, Heath Shulers' responses are in blue, Charles Taylors' are in red, and mine are green according to the Blogger Palette of colors as viewed by Internet Explorer 6something.

Question

Will you support or oppose a balanced Social Security plan to continue the program's guaranteed benefits for future generations?
Will you support or oppose using Social Security taxes to fund private accounts?

AARP Response

For 70 years, America's families have relied on the values embodied in Social Security. The program's guaranteed, risk-free benefit protects people from outliving their savings or the loss of a spouse or parent. We all benefit from the shared responsibility of providing for today's beneficiaries, with the knowledge that that same responsibility will be met by future generations for us.

Candidate Response: Heath Shuler, Democrat

I strongly support efforts to ensure Social Security remains a defined benefit program for years to come and will oppose any privatization efforts. I do not, however, support a reduction in benefits. Social Security’s effectiveness comes from the fact that all Americans benefit. By reducing benefits for certain segments of Americans we risk allowing Social Security to be classified as a welfare program for “others,” not a right earned by all.

My Translation:

Heath Shuler supports Social Security remaining a compulsory program, and refuses to allow any to escape. He told a bald-faced lie when he said that all Americans benefit from from Social Security. Heath, did all Americans benefit from the compulsory program of slavery...Hmm? Everybody except those involved, and with Social Security, everyone IS INVOLVED, including those yet to be born. Social Security is a welfare program, and no one has the right to "take" my hard-earned money from me by threat of force, even if they intend to help someone else, who, like the Grasshopper, fiddled in the sun instead of putting back provisions. You see, in that fable, the Ants voluntarily helped the Grasshopper. There were no government agencies "taking" a portion of the fruits of the ants labors. In the Real World, if I know that increased work on my part, will not see any tangible increase in reward on my part, and I know that if I slack off a little bit, "everyone else" will be forced to "help me" out, Why work so hard? I can play in the sunshine years, knowing that others will be "sharing" a portion of their hard work when it is the winter of my life. And Heath, a right that is "earned by all" is not a right because if the standard is set so low that all earn it, then it is not a right, but a guarantee, and a guarantee implies a guarantor, and when that guarantor is the government put in the place of "benevolent" Dictatorship, my respone is, No Thanks, Heath. I'll take my chances because we all know the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" never works.


Candidate Response: Charles Taylor, Republican

Candidate did not respond to questionnaire.

Given that the AARP is little more than an arm of the Democratic Party, I can hardly blame him, altough he missed a good chance for a good fight that would leave the AARP, and Heath, licking their wounds.

NEXT QUESTION<>

Question
Will you support or oppose a shared approach involving government, employers and individuals, to providing health care coverage for everyone?

Question implies that every one will "share". When you see the word "share" used it really means "forced", forced because, like the "Hotel California", you can never leave, in fact, you are booked in before birth, with an abortion being the only way out of the Social Security Enslavement Program.

AARP Response
In the absence of universal coverage, AARP supports specific reforms that increase the number of people with health care coverage, either through public or private insurance.

Respone implies that AARP is for Universal Health Care, and it cannot be "universal" unless it is forced upon us all, to the unborn generations, again with the implication, to me of a program of enslavement.


More and more Americans, including a growing number of workers, find themselves without health insurance. Increasing health care costs strain businesses large and small, leading them to either stop offering health care coverage all together or raise employee premiums and co-pays. Shifting an ever-larger share of health care costs to individuals does not address the problem of the high cost of health care and threatens the health and financial security of American families.

And why is the cost of Health Coverage going up? Because of a "guaranteed" government payola to pad the profit margin, sort of like the $600 hammers and $2,000 toilet seats a couple of decades ago. Look at Canada. If their "Universal" Health Care is so great, why do so many of them head south with cash to get it here, instead of there?


AARP believes that government, employers and individuals should share the responsibility for paying for health care coverage.


I hear the word "subsidy" in that sentence. When the government provides a subsidy, the true cost of an item is concealed, and there is no benefit for the producer of such item to reduce their cost, because there market share is "guaranteed". And, of course, dear faithful reader, you have spied out that "share" word again. You know what that means.



Candidate Response: Heath Shuler, Democrat

The ability to see a doctor when you are sick should not be a privilege of only the wealthy.

A misleading statement. Anyone who is sick in America, even Illegal Aliens, see doctors everyday in Emergency Departments, Urgent Care Facilities, Free Clinics, and their Personal Physician, should they have had the foresight to contract with one.


It is immoral that over 46 million Americans currently lack the most basic health care coverage.

Is it immoral that I have no Health Care Coverage? It is MY CHOICE not to pay into a corrupt system. I invest my money so that, when the time comes, I have more money to choose my own health care professional within the limits of my money, not dictated to me by a Byzantine set of rules, regulations, and caveats only a lawyer can understand. As soon as you take the Government Teat away from the Insurance Companies and Health Care Providers, the prices will come down.


The rising cost of health care is leading to more and more companies terminating their coverage, which places a greater strain on our hospital emergency rooms and governmental services. We must realize that all sections of America – government, business, and individual -- have a stake in ensuring health care is available to all. I will work diligently to make certain that every American has affordable access to health care.



It is immoral that Heath believes that I should be "forced" to pool my money. That is government-santioned theft. Don't be a theif, Heath, keep your hands off my hard-earned money!




Candidate Response: Charles Taylor, Republican

Candidate did not respond to questionnaire.

Again, a missed opportunity to expose the AARP and his opponent as wolves in sheeps' clothing.

NEXT QUESTION, PLEASE!

Question

Will you support or oppose allowing Medicare to use its bargaining power to negotiate lower prices for needed prescription drugs? Will you support or oppose imposing an annual limit on federal Medicare spending?

Medicare is a government bureacracy. No, I most certainly OPPPOSE it interfering in the marketplace as the former Soviet Union did, which eventually destroyed the economy of that nation. And, as to limits on Federal Medicare Spending? You betcha.

AARP Response

Medicare Part D is now helping millions of people in Medicare save money on their prescription drugs. But while those with Part D coverage are saving, the actual cost of prescription drugs continues to increase at a rate greater than general inflation. AARP believes that more must be done to bring down soaring drug costs and supports allowing Medicare to use its bargaining power to negotiate lower prescription drugs.

These guys have stumbled upon the truth, and are blind to it. They admit that those with Part D Coverage are saving, while the cost continues to climb at an ever faster rate. That is because those without Part D coverage have shouldered the extra burden, of an additional government program, and the drug companies are sheltered from market forces by the well-intentioned government program. They have no incentive to lower prices.

Proposals have been made in Congress to put an annual limit on how much money the federal government spends on the Medicare program. AARP opposes arbitrary limits on Medicare funding.

The AARP would like to increase spending, and burden the public debt even more.

Candidate Response: Heath Shuler, Democrat

I strongly support efforts to reform the Medicare Part D program, especially allowing for the negotiation of prescription drug prices on behalf of America’s 40 million seniors by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Ah Ha! now we see The Secretary of Human Health Services involved in setting price controls, much like the Politburo of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of yesteryear. Please, Heath, didn't you learn in school that a Command Economy never works?!?

We must also correct the flaws in the program that allow prescription plans to drop medications at any time, while preventing seniors from changing their plans for a year, even if their needs change. I will always fight on behalf of American seniors and will oppose any efforts to arbitrarily limit the amount of federal spending on Medicare.

Again with the Command economy stuff, Heath Shuler?

Candidate Response: Charles Taylor, Republican

Candidate did not respond to questionnaire

Yet another missed opportunity to end this Campaign before the end of September!

Next Question!!! I tire of shooting fish in a barrel.

Question
Will you support or oppose a combined approach that involves government and individuals covering long-term care? Will you support or oppose requiring individuals to buy private long-term care insurance?

Again, misleading questions! I am responsible for myself! If someone else becomes responsible,even partly, then they have the right to tell me what I can and cannot do! Nosirree, I'm not about to fall into that trap! "Requiring" individuals to buy long-term care insurance creates an extra demand for a service, and that means higher prices for all, just like these other nonsense schemes where the government interferes with the marktplace.

AARP Response
Long-term care can be costly for people who do not have family caregivers or need more care than family and friends can provide.

It can be, if they don't put their own money to work for them, instead of having it "taken" to "share" with others.

Qualifying for Medicaid-the primary public funding source for long-term care-requires either very low assets and income, or depleting almost all assets and income to pay for care. Currently private insurance is either too expensive or unavailable for many people. Approaches that give people cash payments to choose, buy and manage their care, along with counseling to help them make and manage care choices, help maintain dignity and maximize independence.

Gotcha!!! This is a virtual admission that Medicare is designed to keep people poor, and they play on your fears and uncertainties about the future...the old one bird in the hand or two in the bush scenario! And that dignity you wish to maintain has to be maintained because you took it in the first place.

AARP supports a publicly funded, long-term care cash benefit program-paid for through a combination of government and individual contributions-to give people more control over their own care. AARP opposes requiring individuals to buy private long-term care insurance.

A "contribution" is not a "contribution" if it is forced out of you. Call it what it is, a tax.

Candidate Response: Heath Shuler, Democrat

I strongly support efforts to increase the availability and use of long-term care insurance for all Americans. I will strive to increase the options available to individuals and families for long-term care, but do not support the government requiring the purchase of long-term care insurance.

Now, now, Heath! It is not insurance if all have it, it is an Entitlement. Heath supports inreasing options, just as long as the options are a government program. At least he got the last clause, "but do not support the government requiring the purchase of long-term care insurance." right, although I believe for different reasons. He wants to keep private enterprise out, and I want no "false" demand on the market place.

Candidate Response: Charles Taylor, Republican

Candidate did not respond to questionnaire.

This is getting predictable!

And to the Last Question. Hooray!!!

Question
Do you support or oppose requiring employers to give workers access to automatic payroll deductions to fund their personal IRAs?

Arrrgghhh!!! I'll save my ire for Heaths' response to the question. That way, I can get both targets at once.

AARP Response
Social Security was never intended to be a worker's only source of retirement income. Even though people know Social Security will not be enough to live on, many find it difficult to save for the future. AARP supports creating and expanding supplemental retirement accounts that enable workers to accumulate retirement savings in addition to Social Security's guaranteed benefits.

Wow! An entire three sentences in a row I can find no fault with! (I read it over several times to make sure I wasn't getting fatigued)

AARP supports making saving for retirement simpler and fairer by requiring that employers give workers access to voluntary, automatic payroll deductions to their own IRAs if their employers do not already give them access to a pension or 401(k) plan.

I almost (almost) included that sentence as one I could agree with, except for the part where "employers give workers access to voluntary, automatic payroll deductions to their own IRAs" Wait just a doggone minute! Access to their own money! Where do these people get off "taking" our money, then "allowing" us access to direct it anywhere but our own pockets! These people are sneaky with their verbiage (fancy word for word use!).

Candidate Response: Heath Shuler, Democrat

I firmly believe that by allowing employees to contribute directly to their personal retirement accounts we can significantly increase the number of Americans who participate in these plans.

I cannot allow that statement to go by unchallenged! This reveals Heath Shulers' true attitude toward government, that the Government are the holders of our rights, which they "give" to us. Not so, Heath. If you have ever read your U.S. Constitution, you know the reservoir of rights remain with the people. Not the Federal Government, not the states, and certainly not our employers.
For your edification, Heath, I have pasted the 10th Amendment below, with a link to an online source, should you not have a copy in your pocket, or in your heart. Note to Heath: use your mouse to highlight the word link, then press down on the left button, or get someone to help you.

Amendment X - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I will work closely with employers to increase the availability of direct deposits to IRAs and other retirement programs, but do not support the government forcing all employers to offer this service.

After all, how is heath gonna entice future campaign contibutions from employers who (wisely) want no part of this train wreck!

Candidate Response: Charles Taylor, Republican

Okay, all together now:

Candidate did not respond to questionnaire.

That took all afternoon to type out! Hope you enjoyed reading it, and will forgive the typos. As usual, any mistake in transcribing a question or response is mine and mine alone! And my choice of green does nor imply I endorse the Green Party, I was running out of colors that looked right to me. I tried Orange, but I though it looked too much like the red.

For those interested, the source page is located here.