To recap what they stated, the affair, if it occurred, happened in 2004 well before Obama’s election to the White House. A fine lady named Vera Baker has repeatedly denied that anything happened, but there is a limo driver that asserts that he dropped Baker off at a hotel to have a “secret hotel rendezvous in a Washington hotel where Obama was staying”.

All of this is overshadowed by the fact that the people doing the investigation are trying to pay for information. While this payola style of information gathering is not uncommon in investigative journalism, it does cast some serious doubt on the information that has been obtained to this point.

Another issue I have with this limited report is that any verification of the data that is presented is simply stated as fact. No information on the reporter that claims to be able to corroborate the drivers information is presented, nor is any further information as to the source of the information.

While many of you know that I am a huge critic of the President and most especially his policies, and most of you likely know how badly I would like this information to be true, I am also a good and truthful man. What it comes down to is that the Enquirer was wrong to post this story before they actually had any proof of wrongdoing. The evidence presented is skimpy at best. In short, it smells like a hatchet job at this point.

Hey, at least you know I am fair. Oh yeah, and sorry about the image… I couldn’t resist getting in a little slam on the President.

You may think that I’m being sarcastic, and I am (to a point), yet as of election time back in November of ’08 the two houses of Congress held an approval rating hovering around 11%. That is, only 11 people out of 100 thought that congress was doing a good job. But with House and Senate reelection rates at 94% and 83% respectively, the blame for the low approval rating is clearly the result of somebody ELSE’S representatives, not MINE.

P.T. Barnum would be SO proud. These scheisters have managed to fool MOST of the people ALL of the time.

And they continue to do it, too. Despite all of the evidence that they don’t think that you have a brain cell in your skull. From Harry Reid’s ‘Unwashed Masses’ comment, to the current ‘Climate-gate’, the message is clear for those who choose to see it. In fact, with an attempt to dismiss ‘Climate-gate’ I heard an elected official claim that the average citizen doesn’t understand scientific debate (I don’t remember who, and I couldn’t find it online, so take that as you will).

I tell you this now, and I will stand by this as truth; many of your elected officials will burn this country to the ground (and happily, too), if they are guaranteed to stay in power. Too many of them don’t give a hairy rat’s butt what you think, in point of fact, many of them don’t think you have the capacity to think for yourselves anyway.

Open your eyes.

In late 2008 the majority of Americans voted a grossly inexperienced, massively unqualified junior Senator from Chicago into the most powerful office in the world, using nothing more than charisma and pretty ‘say nothing’ speeches. Within 28 days he effectively DOUBLED the national debt. A debt, I might add, that took over 230 years to accrue.

This President has appointed at least SIX tax cheats to his cabinet (actually, I think he appointed more than that, but only six made the final cut), not the least of which snagged a position as the Secretary of the Treasury (Tim Geithner).

He has appointed, outside of congressional approval, at LEAST 31 czars that are answerable ONLY to him. Many of whom hold strong anti-American, socialist and/or dangerous pacifistic ideals. At least one of which was a SELF-PROCLAIMED COMMUNIST (Van Jones)!

The change that everyone voted for has definitely come, hasn’t it. Too bad it wasn’t the change that we needed.

So now my last question for you: Why is it that “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” are the nine most terrifying words in the English language?

Because we’ve seen what happens when the government steps in to “help”. We saw it in the U.S.S.R., we saw it in Cuba, we saw it in Venezuela. Hell, for those that are old enough to remember (and there are damn few these days), we saw it here in the U.S. during the Great Depression of the 1930′s. And guess what, it’s happening again.

Every time that a government steps in to ‘help’ costs go up, wages go down, unemployment skyrockets, and standards of living plummet.

In the late 1950′s there was a charismatic young man running for political office. Among his political battle-cry’s was a free, universal health care. And the people loved him for it. They cheered him in the streets whenever he came around. They still do, though now the cheer him out of fear, rather than reverence. By all accounts, Cuba was a wonderful place to be in before the Castro regime took power.

But I do have to give Castro credit…. they DO have a free health care system.

If you don’t think that what happened in Cuba could happen here, wake up and look around you. Your elected officials are screwing you over, and you LET them. One thing that many of the people seem to have forgotten, and what most politicians choose to ignore, is that THEY WORK FOR US! WE DO NOT WORK FOR THEM!

–JK

Then something grabbed my attention as I was searching the Internet for religious nuts, I had an awaking while watching a video about people that protest fallen soldiers funerals. People call them nut jobs and all kind of filthy names, even I had the same reaction. Until, I thought a little deeper. I wasn’t about to excuse their behavior based on the fact that these people seem to have a lower I.Q. than Forrest Gump or by the fact that they may have experienced Stigmata. I understood that there is a need for religion. It gives these type of people something to do, something to focus on. It really scared me to think what they would be doing if they had no point of focus. What kind of carnage they could or would inflict upon mankind if not for some kind of guiding light to distract them from the realization that they have no purpose to exist. Then it all became clear to me, why and how they became who they are. I even started to understand why some dumb-asses blow themselves up in the name of Jihad, just as all the Jerry Falwell’s, Jim Baker’s and Profit Muhammad’s have figured out. I will tell you.

A long time ago, before education, cable television and the Internet, people were ignorant because they didn’t know any better. Witchcraft was against the law and during the Crusades, so was not being a Cristian. People were basically stupid and apparently still are. But we can change that and here is how.

What if I were to tell you that if I had created a colony in the middle of nowhere and convinced people to get away from the Right Wing “Call of Socialism” or the Left Wing’s “Spread the Wealth” programs? Do you think people would follow? But what if, just for a moment, you think about this. A new nation. One that is founded on morality, principle, goodness and everyone can get into heaven easily. I will give you an example.

If I were to take 400 young children along with their parents and cut them off from all the distractions of today’s society, put them in a self sufficient atmosphere. Teach them about goodness and morality. Do you think it would work? What if I told them that they were created by a being that contained itself with The Great Soda Can and did so that all would be able to share of it’s greatness? I would give them rules to live by so that we would have a just and righteous life, have them donate monetary goods to me in-order that I, their leader, would distribute them as the great one saw fit. That I was chosen to led them away from all the horrors of the world, into everlasting redistribution. That every time someone drank a soda, they would be rewarded. Do you think it would work? For those of you that say it couldn’t, just look around at all the different religions, with all the beginnings and tell me different. Children are brainwashed and indoctrinated everyday by different religions and they all say the same thing, “This is the only way and all others are false prophets.” They grow up believing in fairy tales that scientifically make no sense. I could even make them believe that if they sacrificed themselves in the name of the Great Soda Can, they would live forever; moreover, that if they destroyed the enemies of the Great Soda Can; they would rewarded beyond comprehension.

Mankind has been turned into sheep by religion and evil men. But I do not blame the evil men, there will always be those willing to take advantage of others. I blame the sheep for being too lazy to think for themselves or too scared to venture out of their years of repetitive rhetoric.

This is only the beginning of a series of articles that are aimed at waking people up from the prison that they have put themselves in. To free them from the bondage of evil men, books written by evil men in the name of a creator and to free their mind and heart.

Yes, you read that correctly, I am a racist. Now, I’m not saying that I run around in a white sheet burning crosses on peoples’ lawns. I’ll leave that to some of the senior members of congress. No, the people on the left will claim that I am a racist because I want our nation’s borders closed to illegal immigration (for those who want to steal that quote to defame me, don’t forget to delete the word ‘illegal’). I am a racist because I oppose Obama-care. I am a racist because I think that every militant extremest Muslim should be dragged out into the middle of the street and beaten to death with a ham hock. Okay, that one’s pretty racist, I’ll give you that. Bottom line, the left will call me racist, because I love my country and want to keep her safe.

But you see, there’s one thing that I don’t understand. It’s kind of like when a right wing candidate ascends to the Presidency, the nut-job conspiracy theorists come out of the woodwork claiming that he will try and create a New World Order/ One World Government, but when a left winger becomes President, and actually TRIES to create a NWO/ OWG, the nuts go silent. So, along those lines, I don’t understand why the crazies rail against people like myself as racists, when the real racists go completely ignored.

Let me ask all of you altruistic non-racists out there a question: what do you think would happen to Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and their rabble-rousing ilk if their professed “agenda” were to actually come to pass? What would happen to them if Dr. King’s dream actually came true? They would be out of a job, that’s what. Therefore, it is in THEIR best interest to maintain the illusion of racial bias. It is in their best interest to continue to keep the black man down. It is in their best interest to keep the blacks thinking that they can’t get ahead in life because of the whites. Those types of people are the true racists. Let me ask another question: If Al and Jessie can pull themselves out of the slums and get ahead in life all on their own, why do they try and make everyone they claim to support think that they can’t do what they themselves did? In other words, if they could do it by themselves, why can’t you do it without their help?

One last thing, I’m going to break one of the biggest rules of the conservative movement. I’m going to tell you one of our biggest secrets. It is the goal of every conservative to destroy the way of life of every minority group in America. It is our goal to stop the “Welfare way of life”. It is our goal to get young men to once again take pride in themselves. It is our goal to get young men out of the gangs, and into worthwhile jobs. It is our goal to get people to stop demanding what they believe they deserve, and to instead EARN what they work for. It is our goal to make people understand that the only thing that they need the government for is to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and generally, to stay the hell out of the way of private citizens so that they can become as great or as small as they desire.

–JK

US Senators’ average annual stock performance beat the market average by approximately 12.3%, while stock purchases made by corporate insiders on average outperform the market by 7.4% and stock portfolios of the average US household under-perform the market by 1.5%.

In 2007, the 10 wealthiest US Senators traded stocks in a total of 45 different companies spanning finance, insurance, oil, pharmaceutical, telecom, and other industries. Those 45 businesses also received $18 billion in federal appropriations that same year.

“Financial disclosure records show that some of these Financial Services Committee members, including Ohio Rep. Charlie Wilson, made bank stock trades on the same day the banks were getting a government bailout from a program Congress approved. The transactions may not have been illegal or against congressional rules, but securities attorneys and congressional watchdog groups say they raise flags about the appearance of conflicts of interest…

For example, Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, a Florida Republican, bought Citigroup stock valued between $1,001 and $15,000 on Oct. 2, the day before the House passed the financial rescue bill and President George W. Bush signed it into law, records show. She opposed the bill.

Eleven days later, she bought $1,001 to $15,000 worth of Bank of America stock. It was on the same day that then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told leading banks that he expected them to accept billions in bailout money to prevent a financial meltdown…

Wilson, a Democrat from the eastern Ohio town of Bridgeport, sold between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of Huntington Bancshares stock on Nov. 14, the same day Huntington got $1.4 billion in bailout money from the federal Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, records show. Wilson’s transactions over the course of last autumn also included Bank of America and BB&T, both beneficiaries of the bank rescue program that Treasury implemented after congressional passage.

Wilson’s spokeswoman said the congressman did not personally pick these trades because he leaves day-to-day investment decisions to a money manager who uses a proprietary model in selecting securities to buy or sell…

A spokesman for Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, a New York Democrat also on the Financial Services Committee, said she similarly leaves transactions solely to the discretion of account managers. McCarthy’s trades included a $2,275 purchase of bailout recipient J.P. Morgan Chase while Congress was still hammering out its rescue bill.

Another member of the Financial Services Committee, Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier of California, said on a recent financial disclosure report that she bought up to $15,000 in Citigroup stock on Nov. 7. That was 10 days after the bank got a $25 billion bailout.

Her office now says the report was filed in error, the transaction should have been listed as her husband’s — and she wishes he had not made it… Her husband wasn’t the only committee spouse trading on bank stocks.

The stockbroker husband of West Virginia’s Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican, sold more than $100,000 in Citigroup stock in several transactions late last year. His brokerage firm was owned by Citigroup and his compensation included Citigroup stock. A Capito spokesman said the House Ethics Committee gave her verbal approval to join the committee despite her husband’s job.

Another committee member, Illinois Republican Judith Biggert, whose husband sold Wells Fargo stock while Congress was helping to shape the rescue bill, said she does not discuss stock transactions with her spouse.”

Stephen Koff and Sabrina Eaton, “Members of U.S. House Financial Services Committee Snapped Up or Dumped Bank Stocks as Bottom Fell Out of Market,”

Plain Dealer, June 25, 2009

“[W]e find that members of the U.S. Senate outperformed the market by almost 100 basis points per month….….When we equally weight the returns of each Senator, the buy portfolio earns a compound annual rate of 28.6% on an equal-weighted basis and 31.1% on a trade-weighted basis compared to 21.3% for the market…….Cumulative abnormal returns for the portfolio of stocks bought by Senators are near zero for the calendar year prior to the date of purchase. After acquisition, the cumulative abnormal return rises over 25% within one calendar year after the purchase date. The cumulative abnormal returns for the portfolio of stocks sold by the Senators are near zero for the calendar year after the date of sale. However, these same stocks saw a cumulative abnormal positive return of 25% during the year immediately preceding the event date. These results suggest that Senators knew the appropriate times to both buy and sell their common stocks…

After being sold by Senators, stocks under-perform the market by 12 basis points per month on a trade-weighted basis….Combining the buy transactions with the sell transactions in a hedged portfolio we find that Senators outperform the market by 97 basis points (nearly 1%) per month on a trade-weighted basis……We find no reliable differences between the returns earned by Democrats and Republicans but seniority appears to be important. Senators with the least seniority (in their first Senatorial term) earn statistically higher returns than those Senators with the longest seniority (over 16 years in the Senate).”

Dec. 2004 – Alan J. Ziobrowski, PhD
“Abnormal Returns from the Common Stock Investments of the U.S. Senate,”

Senator John Kerry (D-MA) – Avg. Net Worth of Household in 2006:  $267,789,805

Kerry sits on the following committees Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Foreign Relations, Finance Chair, Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Top 5 Stocks Owned as of Dec. 31, 2007

COMPANY Exxon Mobil Corp.
AMOUNT $65,002 – $150,000

Additional Information Exxon Mobile Corp. received $1,024,498,594 in government contracts for fiscal year 2007, including over $1 billion from the Defense Logistics Agency.

Senator Kerry sits on the following committees that may present a conflict of interest with this investment: Commerce, Science, and Transportation//Foreign Relations//Finance//Small Business and Entrepreneurship (Chair)

COMPANY Procter & Gamble Co. (P&G)
AMOUNT $30,002 – $100,000

Additional Information Procter & Gamble Co. received $312,449,362 from government contracts for fiscal year 2007, including approx. $312.2 million from the Defense Commissary Agency.

Senator Kerry sits on the following committee that may pose a conflict of interest with this investment: Commerce, Science, and Transportation

COMPANY General Electric Co. (GE)
AMOUNT $17,003 – $80,000

Additional Information General Electric Co. received $3,176,850,382 in government contracts for fiscal year 2007, including a total of approx. $2.6 billion from the Navy, Air Force, and Army.

Senator Kerry sits on the following committees that may present a conflict of interest with this investment:  Commerce, Science, and Transportation//Foreign Relations//Finance//Small Business and Entrepreneurship (Chair)

COMPANY American International Group, Inc. (AIG)
AMOUNT $16,002 – $65,000

Additional Information American International Group, Inc. received $1,783,492 in government contracts for fiscal year 2007.

Senator Kerry sits on the following committees that may present a conflict of interest with this investment:  Commerce, Science, and Transportation//Finance//Small Business and Entrepreneurship (Chair)

COMPANY Intel Corp.
AMOUNT $16,002 – $65,000

Senator Kerry sits on the following committee that may present a conflict of interest with this investment:  Commerce, Science, and Transportation

Top 10 Richest US Senators’ Top Stock Trades in 2007 and Potential Conflicts of Interest  http://insidertrading.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=001580

Stuart P. Green, JD, Professor of Law and Justice Nathan L. Jacobs Scholar at Rutgers School of Law, wrote in his May 13, 2008 email to ProCon.org:

“People in many fields of endeavor are privy to valuable confidential information before it is made public: For example, business executives, investment bankers, and lawyers have access to information about impending corporate mergers and acquisitions; Judges, juries, and court personnel have access to information about the probable outcome of court decisions; and officials at the FDA [Food and Drug Administration], EPA [Environmental Protection Agency], and other administrative agencies have access to information about the likely outcome of regulatory proceedings. All of these individuals are prohibited by law from using such confidential information in the purchase and sale of publicly traded stocks. Likewise, members of Congress and their staffs are also privy to valuable confidential information not yet made public. They have information about the likely outcome of various votes, committee proceedings, and investigations. Such information can be extremely valuable to investors. Those who buy and sell stock on the basis of such non-public information will have an obvious advantage over those who lack such information. This is not the sort of information that even the most savvy and sophisticated investor would be able to obtain legally. From a moral perspective, such informational advantages are indistinguishable from those enjoyed in more familiar forms of insider trading.”

May 13, 2008 – Stuart P. Green, JD

At this point in time, it is already illegal for a felon to own or posses a firearm of any sort. This is well known among felons, as well as the general population. I believe H.R.2401 will bring significant portions of the general citizenry to the level of felons in the eyes of the US government and those state governments that submit to it. (Yeah, that was a bit of a reference to the 10th Amendment…) By doing this, citizens that have not been charged with a crime, much less convicted, will be punished. Not only is it a punishment, it is a violation of any citizens Second Amendment rights that happen to be on the “no fly list” and should be shot down before it ever sees the light of day.

Another point against this bill besides the whole part about it being illegal and outside of the scope of government.

At this exact point in time, there are 77,982 people on the no fly list that is published at a non government website. (I am not going to mention the site due to the fact that the information from it can not be verified at the moment. Lets just take it as an example of what may be correct.) The exact composition of nationalities that make up the list are not currently available to me, but for the sake of the article, lets assume 20% are US citizens for now. That leaves 15,596 citizens that are currently not able to fly on any commercial airplane for some unknown reason. If this bill passes, that means that those 15,596 CITIZENS would not be able to purchase a firearm in the US any more. An obviously illegal step considering the Second Amendment still happens to be an active portion of our Constitution.

There is even more to those numbers though. How many people in the US have the name of Daniel Brown, or Robert Johnson, or David Nelson? What about the host of other names on the list that are probably shared by hundreds of thousands of people in the nation? Are we willing to forgo their rights as well?

There is no big twist when it comes to H.R.2401. It is very simple. In fact, the total size of the bill is only 2 pages long. It doesn’t require a speed reader to dedicate a week of their time to read it like H.R.3200 does. In fact, it only took me about 30 seconds.

The point of this article is simply to let everyone know that H.R.2401 is an illegal bill the second it passes. It strikes down the Constitutional rights of citizens without a felony conviction. I HIGHLY suggest you contact your Representatives to let them know that this bill will be illegal the second it passes and should be fought against with every tooth, nail, or stand of hair they have left. Considering the average age of Congress, I would think they might be running out of teeth and hair, so make sure you hurry! We can’t allow this abomination of a bill to become law.

For a heterosexual person, what if society told you that your natural emotions and love for the opposite sex was wrong and that you needed to be cured through therapy? Could you, or would you even want to be gay only because the majority told you that is what you should be? The religious followers have a tendency to think that people have a choice to be gay or not. So to them I ask, why would anyone choose to be persecuted and shunned?

I had a discussion, in length, with a Southern Baptist. I was trying to point out that if what you feel is natural, how could it be wrong. It was her assertion that sexual orientation was a choice. After some debating over what people feel, versus what people do, we came to the basic understanding that it was a choice to “Act” on your emotions, but it was not a choice to have them. With that, I gave the example, “you mean it’s not a choice if a priest is gay, but it is a choice if he acts out by molesting little boys?” After that, I guess you could say that we came to a point in which we could agree to disagree.

If society told me that it was wrong for me, as a man, to be with a woman, then society would have to find me guilty because I have no control over being attracted to the opposite sex. If I had to hide that or not pursue those feelings, my life would not be a happy one.

I can see why there is confusion though. If you’re a woman and you’re only attracted to other women, then why would you make yourself look and act like a man? Same on the other side, if you’re homosexual man and only attracted to men, then why would you make yourself look and act like a woman? As we all know, perceptions can mean everything to a lot of people; especially to those with tunnel vision.

I have a family member who just happens to be gay. When they told me about it, I had no idea because we had not seen each other in years. Even though I was accepting because I loved them, they wanted to explain what it was like for them. They said, “You know that feeling you get when you hold someone close to you that you love and you can feel the bond of emotion flowing between your heart and theirs? Like when you got married and you felt like your wife was apart of who you were?” and I said yes. “That is what it is like for me, I don’t see the outside of my mate, only the entity of who they are.” And with that, I understood.

American Psychological Association: What about therapy intended to change sexual orientation from gay to straight?

All major national mental health organizations have officially expressed concerns about therapies promoted to modify sexual orientation. To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (sometimes called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective. Furthermore, it seems likely that the promotion of change therapies reinforces stereotypes and contributes to a negative climate for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. This appears to be especially likely for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals who grow up in more conservative religious settings.

en.wikipedia.org/The lists of famous gay, lesbian and bisexual people from all over the world. Only people who are out or who were outed after their death are included.

Sir,

I applaud you for sponsoring S.J.Res.20. While I have not been able to get a copy of the whole bill, the synopsis states that congress would be able to suspend the amendment. I would like to ask if the particular situations in which congress shall be allowed by law to suspend the amendment are described or set forth within the bill? The synopses that I have been able to find to this point seem rather sparse on details and I would hope to be able to know at least some before I urge my own senators and representatives to support your efforts..

Thanks for your time. I hope for your response by either phone or email at your earliest convenience.

Bradley Allen

The conversation follows:

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Jon Kelley wrote:

So, I’m curious. Before I get to my question, though, I thought I’d let you know first-off, that I am what you would term as a ‘right-wing nutjob’, and I haven’t listened to Sean Hannity for probably more than a year. He drives me nuts, and he’s become nothing more than a mouthpiece for the republican party. To him, the party can do no wrong. I don’t think that way.

Anyway, whenever you talk about our nations health care on the air, you always switch to your Hannity voice and mock, “we have the best health care system in the world.” By doing this, it seems to me that you believe that we DON’T, in fact, have the best health care system in the world. So I would like to ask, do you believe this, or are you just taking the opportunity to take another shot at Mr. Hannity? Or is it some other reason alltogether? If you do think this, I’d like to know why you think that socializing our system would help (if that is, indeed, what you think would help).

I’d just like to figure this out, because I think that we DO have the best health care in the world. Having been treated in other countries, and having friends that were treated in other countries (all of which were first world, highly industrialized nations), I have first-hand knowledge of this particular subject.

Thank you for your reply,

Jon Kelley
Cpl. U.S.M.C. (Hon. Discharged)

–To which the local DJ (I’m just going to call him Bob) replied:

Subject: Re: Health care

Here’s one statistic….35th on the list for infant mortality.  That is, there are 34 countries ahead of us who have lower rates of babies dying before the age of 1.

–Now, it seemed to me that Bob didn’t do his homework on this particular subject before he ran his mouth, and it turns out, after about 30 seconds of Googling, I was right.

I replied thusly:

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Jon Kelley wrote:
44th, actually ( https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html#top ) but there are also 179 countries that have a higher infant mortality rate than we do.

Also, you didn’t mention how socializing our system is going to help.

From Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_mortality )
A 2006 article in U.S. News & World Report claims that “First, it’s shaky ground to compare U.S. infant mortality with reports from other countries. The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless.^[4] And some countries don’t reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates. For this very reason, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects the European numbers, warns of head-to-head comparisons by country.”  ( http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/060924/2healy.htm. )

–Sadly, this last paragraph seemed to flow in through his eyeballs, and out his ass.

Well, it seems pretty clear to me how socialized medicine helps this situation. However, if you’d like me to spell it out, I will.  The countries ahead of us, most of them, have very advanced medical techniques at their disposal…just like America.  With socialized medicine almost all (probably all) pregnant women have access to pre-natal care at no cost or low cost.  Okay?

–You think I hit a nerve there? He seems a little upset that I crushed his thoughts with facts, and managed to make his entire argument invalid.

Sadly, this was the end of our conversation, as the reply I sent to him went unanswered, and my e-mail ‘sent’ folder has deleted the letter. I remember I made mention about who would pay for said health care, as the rich will only shell out so much before they go away, and how China wouldn’t foot the bill for our deficits anymore, but beyond that, I don’t recall where I went with anything. Poor me.

–Jon Kelley