The typical authoritarian, Marxist, thug, troll zzazz wrote:
It is quite wrong to blame Obamacare. For years the conservative position has been that poor people do not deserve healthcare and should be just left to die. That position was proved again in Texas when the first US Ebola case was sent home with a bottle of worthless pills. -----And now that cynical, some would say evil, philosophy has come back to bite everyone. Even the most unrepentant conservative on earth must now see that the policy of just letting sick poor people die in their hovels threatens to bring down civilization itself.
I've seen at least one theory where the Roman collapse was actually caused when smallpox entered the empire for the first time. Same with us---because the d****d conservatives would rather court disaster than pay a fair tax.
After 9/11, I advocated the we use the disaster to end air travel, because it spreads disease so rapidly. But we are too dinosaur to wise up. Even now when the danger is manifest the most our leaders think to do is check a few passengers at the border for temperatures.
Zzazz opens in typical DemocRat troll fashion; authoritarian; Marxist; thug by referencing Obamacare. His entire content is intended to distract, deceive, and distort. He doesn't bring his ideas to the marketplace of ideas where one is free to choose based upon merit, and the benefit of what is being sold... oh no, absolutely not, for he knows, as well he surely knows, that Marxism doesn't sell - Marxism is authoritarianism, Marxism is misery, Marxism is the road to the kamps, Marxism is brutal thuggery, and and most importantly history has proven time and again that Marxism is the expressway to mass murder. Zzazz's approach is to impress his views upon all -- no sense in disturbing us with any bothersome free choices. He knows, or rather he should know that there are only two ways to arbitrate any rare resource, and medical care is certainly a rare resource.
The first method of arbitrating any rare resource is with a price (free choice), the second is with a bureaucrat (authoritarian Marxism - no choice). And make no mistake the bureaucrat's purpose is not to tell you yes but rather is to eliminate demand for what may best be described as a limited resource - medical care. And eliminate that demand the bureaucrat does, virtually without appeal -- that's why the appellate panels in Obamacare are caustically referred as death panels. Like Marx zzazz deals in broad sweeping unsubstantiated generalities, generalities given without corroboration or substantiation.
Zzazz goes on to imply that those who favor free choice, in the form of a price for medical care, are inhuman monsters gleefully sentencing those with limited means to disease, suffering, and death. Implicitly he seeks to present his own grace, compassion, and magnanimity - he alone just cares so much, isn't he wonderful, for he shall legislate -- "poof" via dictate, via command -- the rare resource of medical care shall be expanded to meet all needs, and demands (simply because he commands it to be so). Reality has no bearing on anything. He is just so inspiring, unlike the heartless conservatives that he excoriates, and references. Only he can care enough about the poor, only he can care enough about the afflicted to steal all that you have to help them obtain whatever he alone perceives that they shall require at your expense -- and always with more to come in the future... he'll just have to let you know what it'll cost later; and be aware only the heartless squawk.
Zzazz then goes on to reference the Dallas Ebola Presbyterian event as corroboration for the heartlessness of conservatives. Zzazz omits the fact, one is left to presume through deceit, that Duncan (the Ebola patient) made no reference during his first hospital visit of having recently arrived in Dallas from Liberia. Zzazz, through simple deceit, seeks to leave the impression that a competent medical facility, when presented with a patient with a communicable disease with a 70% mortality rate, for which there is no known medical remedy, consciously, through malice, knowingly sent that patient home with useless antibiotics so that he might spread a virulent communicable disease into the general community. Although I can't be certain I must presume that Duncan, as a recent arrival in Dallas, was uninsured, and received treatment at Presbyterian gratis -- free. Duncan would have been treated initially in response the the prevailing Marxist philosophy, here espoused by zzazz, that payment just isn't important, it is only demanded and received by the evil, by the vicious, by the monster, it (payment) in reality doesn't matter.
Zzazz makes no mention of giving what he has, only what you have. There is, glossed over in his missive, no mention of the meaning of compassion, he leaves that open; implicitly he indicts each of us for our past human shortcomings. He implies your defect, a defect that he is more than willing to rectify, and remedy, with your wallet... He sees each circumstance through the glasses of a simpleton: "... isn't that pathetic, somebody should help that guy, I am going to help that guy, gimme your wallet, I am going to help that guy...." He makes no mention of just what compassion is. It is of more than just of passing interest what compassion entails, for it is the very basis of the moral indictment that he makes, and implies.
A brief examination of compassion reveals that compassion is what you willingly do with your money, compassion is what you do with your property, compassion is what you do with your time -- in short compassion is what you do with your resources, with your assets, compassion is charity, compassion is volunteering, compassion is serving those in need. Strange, but not unusual, for authoritarian thugs to omit this point. For it takes no compassion for someone like the millions of zzazzs to steal what you have, as zzazz seeks to administratively do, and give it away. He seeks the savings that you have accrued through honest toil, so that he may give your proceeds, your assets -- not his -- to someone who neither deserves, nor has earned it.
Zzazz is much like the street mugger. He believes that he deserves what is yours more than you; he believes that he may better determine how to use your money than you. The fact that is disturbing to him is that should he use a pistol on the street corner to extract from you what he desires he will quickly be imprisoned. He quickly determines, via Marxism, that to gain access to what you have accrued though honest gainful employment, he may use the cudgel of government, thus he is willing to use up to, and including, mortal force to coerce you into coughing up just exactly what HE believes you should pay even though it is what you, not he, have earned. He believes that there is nothing beyond his reach should he garner a voting majority -- his thinking is the Great Leap Backwards 250 years as it differs in no material manner from the Divine Right of Kings, where there is in fact no private property, as virtually nothing is beyond his reach. Further, he will adjust what he extracts from you, at random, as the future mood strikes him, and as other "worthy ideas" arise -- for he is completely unaware that there is no end to the continuing stream of "worthy ideas", only an end to your ability to pay for his callous simplicity, and guilty conscience.
Finally in his post zzazz gives us the coup de grace... he lets us know just exactly where he is leading us. He presumes to tell us just exactly what we may, or may not be permitted to do. He doesn't like flying... so nope, no flying for us, in traditional Marxist style. But it's only for your own good, mind you... you'll just love living in the 13th century. Had this, or a similar action been taken during the horrible Spanish Flu epidemic in 1918 we would certainly not live in the world we now enjoy. There will be other Ebolas, large numbers of people will die, to regress to the caveman as the "solution" is the mark of idiocy, and serves no one.
Perhaps it bears mentioning that there were no more committed Marxists in their past than David Horowitz, and Thomas Sowell, so perhaps there is hope for zzazz.
