There are people in this nation who seem to think that the First Amendment means freedom form religion, and not freedom of religion. A local man in a town very close to where I live stated in a letter to the editor that Freedom of Religion is not found in the Constitution.
A clear reading of the First Amendment will reveal the truth.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." This portion alone in the amendment says all we need to know.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... The Founders were particularly concerned that the government should not decree a state approved religion to the exclusion of all others as happened both under Catholic Monarchs and Anglican Monarchs. They wanted to establish that the citizens of this nation would be free to practice their own religion, or none if they chose.
,or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... The Founders wrote in this amendment a provision that the government could not prohibit the free exercise of religion.
Free Exercise of Religion. Clearly the same as saying Freedom of Religion, but with freedom comes responsibility, and no one in the practice of their religion may make human sacrifice, or commit acts of sex with children under th cover of religion.
The rest of the amendment continues "or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".
That last portion also prohibits the government from interfering with the free speech of religions to teach and preach what they believe, as well as to protect the individual rights of citizens to criticize their government, and the right of the press, the newspapers and broadcast media to report the news and also criticize the government. We are free to assemble peaceably, protecting public gatherings, whether religious or secular.
There are reasonable constraints placed on free assembly, allowing local governmental entities to require permits for parades and demonstrations or marches in order for them to plan for the extra law enforcement personnel to direct traffic, protect pedestrians, and to control those who become unruly or begin to riot.The local government may choose to issue a permit at no cost, or to charge a nominal fee to help offset the extra costs of keeping the peace and safety.
I began by addressing the Freedom of Religion issue, and the prohibition of Congres from establishing a state religion. I have gone ahead and covered the free speech and assmeb.y and the rest because I don't want anyone to think that I consider any part of the amendment to be seperate from the rest.
The First Amendment stands as a whole, for a reason, but it does not establish a "wall of seperation" between state and religion. That phrase comes from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson tho the Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury Connecticut, reassuring them that the government would not interfere with their freedoms nor be allowed to tax them as had been the practice before the Revolution, when the King taxed all non Church of England churches to support the Anglican churches in America.
We, as a result of the experiences of the colonists/Founders, are not taxed to support any church.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Raid on West Texas Polygamists
What is the problem that requires the removal of all of the minor children from the YFZ Ranch?
Real short: Child sex abuse.
The charges being leveled against these people have nothing to do with their religion, and everything to do with State Laws meant to prevent sexual abuse of children. The State of
Texas states that there is evidence of at least one of the girls having given birth at age thirteen.
In the State of Texas, any one under the age of fourteen is considered not capable of making a consensual agreement to have sex with an adult. State Law requires that a female be at least sixteen years old with her parents consent to marry. If they are under sixteen, even though the parents consent, the law has been violated.
There appears to be evidence that more than one of these girls has been married off at an age of less than sixteen, and subsequently entered into a sexual relationship with the adult male to whom they have "married" to.
There are many things that Religious Freedom under the First Amendment of the Consitution do not allow. An easy example would be human sacrifice. Another example is use of illegal drugs
as part of ones religion.
In the same vein of following the law, Child molesting and sexual performance of a child can not be covered under Freedom of Religion. The whole community is involved in a conspiracy to commit criminal acts of a sexual nature against minor children. They practice this as a lifestyle under the name of religion, all are knowledgeable of what is occurring, and all have been involved in concealing these criminal acts from discovery by the law, which requires a person knowing that such a crime has been committed must report it to the appropriate authorities.
Up to now, only Warren Jeffs, their "prophet", has been charged with conspiracy, and that in Utah, where he is now in prison for the forced marriage of a fourteen year old girl to her cousin. The State of Utah has been cracking down on these men who marry and have sex with prohibited minors, that is why they have built their compound in West Texas.
The State could charge all of the adults with conspiracy, but up to now has not chosen to do so.
What person among you can not understand that this is a case of protecting minor children from adults, who have themselves been raised in this idea that this is alright?
I am a small government conservative who normally does not like to see CPS get a foot in anyone's door except in extreme cases. I believe this is an extreme case. If one married couple were teaching their daughters that it was alright to marry and have sex at the age of thirteen, in violation of State Law, no one would be having a problem with the State's involvement, except probably pedophiles.
Real short: Child sex abuse.
The charges being leveled against these people have nothing to do with their religion, and everything to do with State Laws meant to prevent sexual abuse of children. The State of
Texas states that there is evidence of at least one of the girls having given birth at age thirteen.
In the State of Texas, any one under the age of fourteen is considered not capable of making a consensual agreement to have sex with an adult. State Law requires that a female be at least sixteen years old with her parents consent to marry. If they are under sixteen, even though the parents consent, the law has been violated.
There appears to be evidence that more than one of these girls has been married off at an age of less than sixteen, and subsequently entered into a sexual relationship with the adult male to whom they have "married" to.
There are many things that Religious Freedom under the First Amendment of the Consitution do not allow. An easy example would be human sacrifice. Another example is use of illegal drugs
as part of ones religion.
In the same vein of following the law, Child molesting and sexual performance of a child can not be covered under Freedom of Religion. The whole community is involved in a conspiracy to commit criminal acts of a sexual nature against minor children. They practice this as a lifestyle under the name of religion, all are knowledgeable of what is occurring, and all have been involved in concealing these criminal acts from discovery by the law, which requires a person knowing that such a crime has been committed must report it to the appropriate authorities.
Up to now, only Warren Jeffs, their "prophet", has been charged with conspiracy, and that in Utah, where he is now in prison for the forced marriage of a fourteen year old girl to her cousin. The State of Utah has been cracking down on these men who marry and have sex with prohibited minors, that is why they have built their compound in West Texas.
The State could charge all of the adults with conspiracy, but up to now has not chosen to do so.
What person among you can not understand that this is a case of protecting minor children from adults, who have themselves been raised in this idea that this is alright?
I am a small government conservative who normally does not like to see CPS get a foot in anyone's door except in extreme cases. I believe this is an extreme case. If one married couple were teaching their daughters that it was alright to marry and have sex at the age of thirteen, in violation of State Law, no one would be having a problem with the State's involvement, except probably pedophiles.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Moral Relativism
Moral Relativism is a curse to Society.
What is Moral Relativism? Basically, it is the philosophy of life that says that moral values are relative to the time in which one lives, the situation they find themselves in, and their personal choices and desires in fleshly pleasure.
It is Moral Relativism that has brought about the widespread acceptance of behaviors that as little as fifty years ago, would have been deemed reprehensible. Some examples of this would be adultery, sex out side of marriage, homosexual behavior, and child molesting.
God set Moral Boundaries for us for our own good. Every boundary passed in rebellion against Him takes us closer to accepting another deviant behavior.
You might protest that child molesting is still unacceptable, and I will point out to you the existence of groups like NAMBLA. The National Man Boy Love Association. Among the members of that organization have been priests, businessmen, college professors, psychiatrists, and others. These men are not impoverished financially, in fact, most are very well to do, wealthy pedophiles who prefer boys over men or women for sex. While they have yet to get any laws passed legalizing their activities, they have helped see to it that homosexual men and couples are allowed to act as foster parents and even adopt those who will become their victims.
If we do not turn to God, and follow Him, in time, everything will be acceptable, including men and women having sexual relationships with boys and girls. The deviant morally corrupt university professors and clergy who are involved int theses behaviors are inculcating a philosophy in students that is aimed at corrupting our society. Psychiatrists once defined homosexuality as a deviant behavior, but have now declared it normal, and just a sign of our times.
How long will it be before they declare sex between adult men and women with little girls and boys to be normal, just a sign of our times.
What is Moral Relativism? Basically, it is the philosophy of life that says that moral values are relative to the time in which one lives, the situation they find themselves in, and their personal choices and desires in fleshly pleasure.
It is Moral Relativism that has brought about the widespread acceptance of behaviors that as little as fifty years ago, would have been deemed reprehensible. Some examples of this would be adultery, sex out side of marriage, homosexual behavior, and child molesting.
God set Moral Boundaries for us for our own good. Every boundary passed in rebellion against Him takes us closer to accepting another deviant behavior.
You might protest that child molesting is still unacceptable, and I will point out to you the existence of groups like NAMBLA. The National Man Boy Love Association. Among the members of that organization have been priests, businessmen, college professors, psychiatrists, and others. These men are not impoverished financially, in fact, most are very well to do, wealthy pedophiles who prefer boys over men or women for sex. While they have yet to get any laws passed legalizing their activities, they have helped see to it that homosexual men and couples are allowed to act as foster parents and even adopt those who will become their victims.
If we do not turn to God, and follow Him, in time, everything will be acceptable, including men and women having sexual relationships with boys and girls. The deviant morally corrupt university professors and clergy who are involved int theses behaviors are inculcating a philosophy in students that is aimed at corrupting our society. Psychiatrists once defined homosexuality as a deviant behavior, but have now declared it normal, and just a sign of our times.
How long will it be before they declare sex between adult men and women with little girls and boys to be normal, just a sign of our times.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Political Parties, Third Parties
If you are unhappy with the present situation with the domination of politics by two parties that no longer represent the people and their economic well being, what can you do?
Many have tried to organize third parties, which is actually a contradictory term, since it lumps all other competing parties under the one heading of third parties. These efforts have failed, not for lack of work or commitment by those dedicated to the cause, but in my opinion, more out of a fear of the majority of the voters to vote outside their normal party boundaries.
Let's be honest with ourselves people, the two dominant parties are too busy bickering when Congress is in session to accomplish any thing positive. Not enough people are willing to join a new party, and the people who are willing to join an alternative party are so diverse in many ways, that the fail to coalesce into a political power because of an unwillingness to find a common ground.
All is not lost, yet. The people are the power of this nation, not the politicians, but we must take back that power. It is easy to sit on the couch, watching TV, and complaining, but you get out of it what you put into it.
Either become active in local politics with the party you have been voting for and make your voice be heard, rather than gathering around the "leaders" like sheep bleating on their way to the slaughter; or help start a party big enough to challenge the Republican and Democratic parties.
It won't be easy, but it must be done in order to restore the government to a position of working together party to party, to accomplish any true reform in taxes, medical regulation, and many other problems that are of great concern to us.
All of politics is compromise, by necessity, as our elected leaders must represent every one of their constituents, not just those who voted for them particularly. It is immature and childish for adult people to behave in the way that many of us have when we don't get what we want from the elected.
The President, whether he or she is your choice or not, represents all of us. So also do the Congressmen and Senators represent everyone in their district, not just those who voted for them. If they don't act in a way that is beneficial to all of us, we must hold them, and the respective political parties responsible. This doesn't have to wait until the next election cycle, start now. Write your Senators and Congressmen now; deluge them with mail, flood their e-mail accounts; but do so respectfully, and make sure you let them know what your position on current issues are instead of letting their aides have an undue influence, as well as letting the lobbyists have all the influence instead of us.
Become your own lobbyist. Form neighborhood groups and lobby; let you neighbors all have the opportunity to have their say. There is no rule that says that neighbors of opposing viewpoints can't express both sides of an issue in one letter, making it clear that all of you are demanding responsibility and ethical behavior in Washington, D.C.
Many have tried to organize third parties, which is actually a contradictory term, since it lumps all other competing parties under the one heading of third parties. These efforts have failed, not for lack of work or commitment by those dedicated to the cause, but in my opinion, more out of a fear of the majority of the voters to vote outside their normal party boundaries.
Let's be honest with ourselves people, the two dominant parties are too busy bickering when Congress is in session to accomplish any thing positive. Not enough people are willing to join a new party, and the people who are willing to join an alternative party are so diverse in many ways, that the fail to coalesce into a political power because of an unwillingness to find a common ground.
All is not lost, yet. The people are the power of this nation, not the politicians, but we must take back that power. It is easy to sit on the couch, watching TV, and complaining, but you get out of it what you put into it.
Either become active in local politics with the party you have been voting for and make your voice be heard, rather than gathering around the "leaders" like sheep bleating on their way to the slaughter; or help start a party big enough to challenge the Republican and Democratic parties.
It won't be easy, but it must be done in order to restore the government to a position of working together party to party, to accomplish any true reform in taxes, medical regulation, and many other problems that are of great concern to us.
All of politics is compromise, by necessity, as our elected leaders must represent every one of their constituents, not just those who voted for them particularly. It is immature and childish for adult people to behave in the way that many of us have when we don't get what we want from the elected.
The President, whether he or she is your choice or not, represents all of us. So also do the Congressmen and Senators represent everyone in their district, not just those who voted for them. If they don't act in a way that is beneficial to all of us, we must hold them, and the respective political parties responsible. This doesn't have to wait until the next election cycle, start now. Write your Senators and Congressmen now; deluge them with mail, flood their e-mail accounts; but do so respectfully, and make sure you let them know what your position on current issues are instead of letting their aides have an undue influence, as well as letting the lobbyists have all the influence instead of us.
Become your own lobbyist. Form neighborhood groups and lobby; let you neighbors all have the opportunity to have their say. There is no rule that says that neighbors of opposing viewpoints can't express both sides of an issue in one letter, making it clear that all of you are demanding responsibility and ethical behavior in Washington, D.C.
Friday, March 21, 2008
The Ten Commandments, set aside, or not?
Some teach that the Ten Commandments, the Law, were set aside when Christ died on the cross.
I believe that the Ten Commandments still stand, and judge the unsaved, convicting them under a sentence of death.
Allow me to appeal to the Scriptures to defend my position.
In Colossians 2: 13-14 we find written: "And you being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of you flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross".
In the Greek text from which this passage is translated ,the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, pertains to a legal document, here the Commandments being the legal authority. What then is the document? It is the certificate of the finding that we owe God our very lives for failing to live by his commandments. It is a bill of debt that says that we owe Him our blood.
This is supported by what we find in Hebrews 9: 22 "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood: and without shedding of blood is no remission (of sin)". Before the shedding of the blood of Christ for our sins, there were yearly sacrifices at the Temple, for the covering of sins one year at a time.
That the sacrifice of Christ was once and for all time, we find in Hebrews 10: 12-14. "But this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God:
From henceforth expecting (waiting)
till his enemies be mad his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
The Ten Commandments were not set aside, the just death to which we who are saved were condemned under the judgment by the Law, was set aside, because Christ shed His blood for us.
In Romans 3:19-20 we read: "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guity before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in hi sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Christ tells us in Matthew 5: 17 "Think not I am come to destroy the law, or the prohets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill.
The sinner who continues to deny God is still found guilty under the Law, is condemned to eternal death (separation from God) already, and is cast into the Lake of Fire for refusing God's Grace, paid for with the blood of His only Begotten Son. When a man dies, it is too late to repent.
Father, we pray that those who remain lost will come to the saving knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. May all understand that each must reconcile themselves to you only through your Son and no other; that all have sinned and come short of your Glory, but that salvation requires each individual to approach you in humility, confessing that they are in fact a sinner and in need of the saving blood of Jesus Christ. Amen
I believe that the Ten Commandments still stand, and judge the unsaved, convicting them under a sentence of death.
Allow me to appeal to the Scriptures to defend my position.
In Colossians 2: 13-14 we find written: "And you being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of you flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross".
In the Greek text from which this passage is translated ,the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, pertains to a legal document, here the Commandments being the legal authority. What then is the document? It is the certificate of the finding that we owe God our very lives for failing to live by his commandments. It is a bill of debt that says that we owe Him our blood.
This is supported by what we find in Hebrews 9: 22 "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood: and without shedding of blood is no remission (of sin)". Before the shedding of the blood of Christ for our sins, there were yearly sacrifices at the Temple, for the covering of sins one year at a time.
That the sacrifice of Christ was once and for all time, we find in Hebrews 10: 12-14. "But this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God:
From henceforth expecting (waiting)
till his enemies be mad his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
The Ten Commandments were not set aside, the just death to which we who are saved were condemned under the judgment by the Law, was set aside, because Christ shed His blood for us.
In Romans 3:19-20 we read: "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guity before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in hi sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Christ tells us in Matthew 5: 17 "Think not I am come to destroy the law, or the prohets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill.
The sinner who continues to deny God is still found guilty under the Law, is condemned to eternal death (separation from God) already, and is cast into the Lake of Fire for refusing God's Grace, paid for with the blood of His only Begotten Son. When a man dies, it is too late to repent.
Father, we pray that those who remain lost will come to the saving knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. May all understand that each must reconcile themselves to you only through your Son and no other; that all have sinned and come short of your Glory, but that salvation requires each individual to approach you in humility, confessing that they are in fact a sinner and in need of the saving blood of Jesus Christ. Amen
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Politics and the Truth
What is the biggest casualty of politics? Is it the people, or is it the Truth?
I submit to you that the people are casualties because of their own choices. They vote for who ever their parents or friends, or teachers, or college professors will vote for. They do not research enough about the candidates to know what their past record is.
In politics, a candidates past record is a very good indicator of what their future record will be. In all of my life since I was 10 years old (Kennedy vs. Nixon), I have yet to see a wholesale change in any politicians voting patterns. That can be bad, if their values don't represent your; or that can be good, if their values closely match yours.
You will note that I said "closely match", not that they are perfectly in alignment with you. It would be rare for any one to match one-hundred per cent with a another in values, morals, and political ideation.
Do a little fact checking; find out if what the candidates are saying, including about each other, are true and accurate. Politics is full of outright lies, mis-characterizations of what another said, and lies mixed with the truth.
In November we face another Presidential election, one which many people are saying presents us with a liberal Republican versus a liberal Democrat, and very little difference between the two. I don't believe that John McCain is that far to the left, but I think he is wrong on immigration.
I believe that another Clinton Whitehouse is a complete move in the wrong direction; Hillary is a socialist.Socialist take from the wage earners to give to the poor and those who could work, but don't. They propagandize that the unwilling to work are that way because society has failed them, and society must now support them. If I chose to let the traumatic events of my childhood define me, I would be dead or at best a quivering heap of jellylike flesh.
My life record, so to speak, is not stellar. I have, in the past, broken quite a few laws; used more than a few drugs; and lived an immoral lifestyle. This is no longer a way of life for me. I have chosen self responsibility. During some of the roughest times of my life I managed to serve seven years in the U.S. Army; taught myself to work on machinery, and took all the instruction I could find from skilled craftsmen. Plumbers, Mechanics, Electricians, Electronic Technicians, and business managers became my teachers. Now in my later years, I am handicapped, and for a while had a pity party over it. I overcame my self pity by the Word of God, by helping others, by finding a Church Family. I do all I can physically, because God encourages me, and His People encourage me.
I've left Barak Obama for last, not because my view of him is lower than my view of other. Barak is a gifted speaker without a doubt. In spite of the endorsement of a couple of Kennedy's, he is not a John Kennedy, and he is not the Messiah. I don't think him any less capable than Hillary Clinton. Why then, do I object to him as a candidate for President of these United States. Because I believe that he, like Hillary, is a socialist, just one who is clever enough to sugar coat the pill he wants the people to swallow.
There is no doubt that there are problems with our health care system. However, government intervention in it is a large part of the problem, not the solution. Before I became a patient in the Veterans Affairs Medical System, I used the same clinics all my friends and neighbors did. Over the years I noticed that the number of staff processing paper work required by the government for Medicare/Medicaid patients grew until the paperwork staff in may places outnumbered the number of actual health care workers.
If a Doctor accepts Medicaid/Medicare patients, his office has to fill out a large number of forms to send back to the government. The clinic can keep hiring staff for this, or, as many have begun to do, they can stop accepting Medicare/Medicaid patients, and not take new ones as old ones die or leave for other doctors. As for insurance paperwork, the last time I checked, clinics were no longer processing the insurance forms for you, but required that you fill them out, and they would get the proper signatures before you sent them to you insurance company, and waited for reimbursement.
This nation is drowning in government paperwork and financial debt. Our next President has to be able to help steer this nation back on course, act as go between and advisor to Congress, a traditional role taken on by Presidents who were able to get Congress members to hammer out compromises where necessary. He or she, must also have the will to veto legislation that will keep this nation in debt, it's currency weak, and the engines of industry moving overseas for cheaper labor.
Speaking of jobs gong overseas, both of the Democratic candidates have promised to do something about it; one by threatening higher taxes on companies headquartered in the U.S., but with production facilities in other countries. Where in the constitution is a President or Congress, given the authority to give orders to the President's and CEO's of these companies?
It would be a small matter for these companies to move their headquarters offshore to countries where the tax rules are more favorable. Some have already done this.
Last, but not least for this post: Know Your Constitution.
I submit to you that the people are casualties because of their own choices. They vote for who ever their parents or friends, or teachers, or college professors will vote for. They do not research enough about the candidates to know what their past record is.
In politics, a candidates past record is a very good indicator of what their future record will be. In all of my life since I was 10 years old (Kennedy vs. Nixon), I have yet to see a wholesale change in any politicians voting patterns. That can be bad, if their values don't represent your; or that can be good, if their values closely match yours.
You will note that I said "closely match", not that they are perfectly in alignment with you. It would be rare for any one to match one-hundred per cent with a another in values, morals, and political ideation.
Do a little fact checking; find out if what the candidates are saying, including about each other, are true and accurate. Politics is full of outright lies, mis-characterizations of what another said, and lies mixed with the truth.
In November we face another Presidential election, one which many people are saying presents us with a liberal Republican versus a liberal Democrat, and very little difference between the two. I don't believe that John McCain is that far to the left, but I think he is wrong on immigration.
I believe that another Clinton Whitehouse is a complete move in the wrong direction; Hillary is a socialist.Socialist take from the wage earners to give to the poor and those who could work, but don't. They propagandize that the unwilling to work are that way because society has failed them, and society must now support them. If I chose to let the traumatic events of my childhood define me, I would be dead or at best a quivering heap of jellylike flesh.
My life record, so to speak, is not stellar. I have, in the past, broken quite a few laws; used more than a few drugs; and lived an immoral lifestyle. This is no longer a way of life for me. I have chosen self responsibility. During some of the roughest times of my life I managed to serve seven years in the U.S. Army; taught myself to work on machinery, and took all the instruction I could find from skilled craftsmen. Plumbers, Mechanics, Electricians, Electronic Technicians, and business managers became my teachers. Now in my later years, I am handicapped, and for a while had a pity party over it. I overcame my self pity by the Word of God, by helping others, by finding a Church Family. I do all I can physically, because God encourages me, and His People encourage me.
I've left Barak Obama for last, not because my view of him is lower than my view of other. Barak is a gifted speaker without a doubt. In spite of the endorsement of a couple of Kennedy's, he is not a John Kennedy, and he is not the Messiah. I don't think him any less capable than Hillary Clinton. Why then, do I object to him as a candidate for President of these United States. Because I believe that he, like Hillary, is a socialist, just one who is clever enough to sugar coat the pill he wants the people to swallow.
There is no doubt that there are problems with our health care system. However, government intervention in it is a large part of the problem, not the solution. Before I became a patient in the Veterans Affairs Medical System, I used the same clinics all my friends and neighbors did. Over the years I noticed that the number of staff processing paper work required by the government for Medicare/Medicaid patients grew until the paperwork staff in may places outnumbered the number of actual health care workers.
If a Doctor accepts Medicaid/Medicare patients, his office has to fill out a large number of forms to send back to the government. The clinic can keep hiring staff for this, or, as many have begun to do, they can stop accepting Medicare/Medicaid patients, and not take new ones as old ones die or leave for other doctors. As for insurance paperwork, the last time I checked, clinics were no longer processing the insurance forms for you, but required that you fill them out, and they would get the proper signatures before you sent them to you insurance company, and waited for reimbursement.
This nation is drowning in government paperwork and financial debt. Our next President has to be able to help steer this nation back on course, act as go between and advisor to Congress, a traditional role taken on by Presidents who were able to get Congress members to hammer out compromises where necessary. He or she, must also have the will to veto legislation that will keep this nation in debt, it's currency weak, and the engines of industry moving overseas for cheaper labor.
Speaking of jobs gong overseas, both of the Democratic candidates have promised to do something about it; one by threatening higher taxes on companies headquartered in the U.S., but with production facilities in other countries. Where in the constitution is a President or Congress, given the authority to give orders to the President's and CEO's of these companies?
It would be a small matter for these companies to move their headquarters offshore to countries where the tax rules are more favorable. Some have already done this.
Last, but not least for this post: Know Your Constitution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)