But It's Just a Bumper Sticker

"It is now clear that George Bush's misnamed 'War on Terror' has backfired — and is now part of the problem. The War on Terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It's a bumper sticker, not a plan." John Edwards.

Thanks for clearing that up for us Jonny boy

This would make a great bumper sticker too:
FBI Uncovers JFK Airport Terror Plot

Counterterrorism blog has good info on the plot that we all know about now. They belong to a group called Jamaat-al-Muslimeen (JAM)

But never fear, these guys don't belong to al-qaeda so they couldn't have been actual terrorists. I know this because the left told me that only al-qaeda are terrorists and that's why we shouldn't go after other muslim extremists like Saddam. Oh yeah, Murtha told me that this was all because of our war in Iraq.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: I want to get back to my first question, but let me pick up on something you said just there. You believe that these homegrown terrorist plots are being inspired by the U.S. work in Iraq right now?
JOHN MURTHA, CONGRESSMAN: Absolutely. George, they were inspired by them all over the world. Our presence in Iraq, our occupation in Iraq, gives these people the inspiration. Now, we didn’t have this problem before, they came from Afghanistan. But, now we even have it in the United States. So, I’m absolutely convinced that this is the kind of thing that inspires these people.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But we did have 9/11 before we went into Iraq.
MURTHA: Yeah, we had 9/11, but that came from Afghanistan. There was no, there was no al Qaeda in Iraq. We don’t even know how many al Qaeda are in Iraq right now. For instance, we think a couple of thousand. They’ll take care of al Qaeda. They’ll get rid of al Qaeda. Our presence is inspiring them to recruit people all over the world. This is the problem we have.

So there was no inspiration for terrorist before the war in Iraq, War On Terror is just a bumper sticker, there was no war before it was invented by Bush. Those would make great bumper stickers John and John. Oh, here is another good sticker, why are politicians names John such jackasses?

Health Care Reform, Just Another Way To Raise Taxes

On Wednesday the Gather homepage posted a poll that asked if you would be willing to pay more in taxes for Universal Health Care. Out of the almost 200 respondents, a shocking 57% answered yes. I assume that most of the people answering yes have an amount that would be too high to pay in taxes for health care, social security, welfare, or even national defense. The poll did not mention how much you would have pay in taxes for the coverage, which is not that different from many of the health care plans being touted by some of the presidential candidates.

Democratic Senator Barack Obama released the “details” of his plan recently, during which he mentioned that it would provide an average of $2500 savings for each individual covered. He plans to make the government, businesses, and consumers share in the cost. Allow me to translate that last statement. Each and every one of us will be footing the entire bill for this health care coverage. The government has no means of making money to pay into the system. They rely on tax revenues from all of us to pay the bills. Businesses pay their taxes, for everything not just health care, by incorporating their taxes into the price of their product or service. Their customers pay their taxes by buying their product or service. If the business tax goes up to help pay for health care then so will the price of their product or service. Lastly the consumer is privileged to pay whatever cost is left.

Former First Lady Hillary Clinton was first on the scene in 1993 during her husband’s first year in the White House. She was the point person for the Health Care Reform plan that the White House tried to push through Congress. Her website states that she wears the “scars” of fighting for health care reform. Her reform was ultimately defeated after “aggressive opposition”. Keep in mind that her version of reform was defeated by a Democrat controlled House and Senate. Her own party rejected her plan in 1994 and was one of the reasons for the Republican takeover of Congress that same year. She has not offered a new plan, so we can only surmise that she will reintroduce her original health care reform plan.

Former Senator John Edwards offer the most details of his health care plan, calling for, among other things, all Americans to contribute to drive down the cost of health insurance, and to expand Medicaid. He also talks of tax credits and using “innovative” ways to control health care costs. I admit that I am leery of any politician that says they will “find innovative ways to control health care costs”. In my skeptical mind, that simply means higher taxes. A brief look at history will show that most attempts by the government to “control” the cost of a product or service, usually drives the price of that product or service up in the long run.

Proponents of this Universal Health Care, or Socialized Medicine, point to Canada and to Cuba as shining examples of how well Socialized Medicine does work. A simple Google search provided a few major media stories that show a different story. Canada offers free health care for all, but you just have to wait in a little line to be seen. One doctor spoke of a letter informing a patient of an electrocardiogram in 3 months, a significant wait for someone with a heart condition. An added statement on the letter is frightening. It added: "If the person named on this computer-generated letter is deceased, please accept our sincere apologies." Controversial filmmaker Michael Moore’s recent movie “Sicko” is a look at health care and points to Cuba as having world class health care. Mr. Moore neglects to point out that when Cuban dictator Fidel Castro needed surgery he had a Spanish surgeon flown in to perform the surgery. If Cuba has the finest health care available, why would the leader of that country need to fly in a surgeon for his own surgery?

One aspect of each plan posited that is the same is that in order to pay for the reform, taxes will need to be raised. None of the candidates have mentioned how much taxes will need to be raised to pay for their plans. Obama mentions that he will rollback the temporary tax cuts for the wealthy. He does not inform us of what the criteria is for being considered wealthy. Wealth is a relative term. For a person who makes $20,000 a year, anyone who makes more than they do could be considered wealthy by comparison. I find it amusing that the last time a presidential candidate publicly admitted that they were going to raise taxes if elected, it was 1984 and the candidate was Walter Mondale. For the record, he lost 49 out of 50 states in the general election to President Ronald Reagan.

Health care in the United States is by no means perfect, but what country in the world has better health care? There is room for improvement in any system, but creating a socialistic system of health care is not the answer. Every time the government tries to “reform” something, we all end up paying more in taxes and the “reform” is worse than what we had in the first place. The Medicare reform plan that was passed a few years ago, more than doubled in cost before the ink on the bill was dry. Why does anyone believe that this government plan will be any different?

"War on Terror? Why That's Just Crazy Talk," John 'The Next President of the United States' Edwards

Democrat John Edwards Wednesday repudiated the notion that there is a "global war on terror," calling it an ideological doctrine advanced by the Bush administration that has strained American military resources and emboldened terrorists. Edwards called the war on terror a "bumper sticker" slogan Bush had used to justify everything...

read more digg story