Darryl Worley – “Keep The Change”

Dixie Chicks taking a shot at President = Traitor!!! … Darryl Worley taking a shot at President = Patriot!!!

Songs like this make me embarassed for country music. Nothing more than a pandering, posturing, dishonest attempt at tapping into a specific audience segment. Isn’t that the opposite of what country music should be? As in, honest and clear expression without any pretense or agenda?

this actually makes me laugh out loud!! It is stunning that there’s a market for this type of song – wow. :s

Aside from the lyrics, this song doesn’t have a good melody or production. It’s all very generic. I’ll at least give Toby’s “Courtesy of the Red White and Blue” credit for being catchy and even musically interesting. This is just boring, political message notwithstanding.

And, yes, Haggard is pretty much a genius while Worley is not.

The one thing that I think is ludicrous is the title phrase. I mean, I understand if you love America. I love America. You just have to be pretty damn arrogant to suggest that it is a perfect country. That there is no room for improvement. That there’s not a single thing wrong. That’s what you’re saying when you say “Keep the Change.” You don’t have a problem with violent crime, unemployment, homelessness, etc. You want to keep everything just the way it is. I call that bullshit. I don’t know. Maybe you just live in a different part of the country than me where everything’s rainbows and sunshine. I doubt it. More likely, you just don’t think. “Keep the Change” isn’t common sense or any kind of sense. It’s lazy man’s logic.

And not every politically themed song by Haggard has been embraced in the least. In fact, the only two that have become classics are right leaning. The songs that have been more left leaning lately haven’t even been taken seriously, because they’ve seemed more opportunistic than relevant, much like this particular song. So, I don’t think Merle gets a free pass for his politically themed songs at all.

Sam, I’d wish I could like this song more but its musical structure just isn’t that interesting! The Obama shredding parody songs by Paul Shanklin, that are fully informed and cut deep into the heart of liberal idiocy, are more my speed!

I guess Darryl qualifies as one of those paranoid country folk types Obama described as: “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” Or just maybe these folks are informed enough to realize the terrible threat to the Constitution that Obama and a Democrat controlled Congress represent, as already proven by the thuggish passage of Obamacare.

Maybe Darryl can now open his concerts with the newly rewritten version of The Pledge of Allegiance proposed by our country’s Chairman! Here it is:

I Pledge My Allegiance
To Obama
And to the Socialist States of America
And to the Collective
For Which it Now Stands
One Nation
Without God
Unexceptional
With Poverty
And Misery
For All

This is to be followed by a hearty outburst of Obama’s 20 year pastor Jeremiah Wright’s favorite saying “Gawd Damn America”! Aww, ain’t liberalism just grand…

Good song! Everybody always breaks politics down to two parties. Well, I don’t think Worley is going after the Democrats in the song, he’s going after the government as a whole. Quite frankly, the whole government is broken. The entire House and Congress needs to be flipped! Career politicians, both Democratic and Republican, are ruining this country! What we need is the common sense party! And, Obama is an absolute turd for skipping the Memorial Day ceremonies in DC to go on vacation! Great leadership! He is a joke! Worst president ever, already! Way to handle the oil spill crisis too! If Bush had done the same thing the liberal media would be on him like flies on shit!I’m done. Talking about Obama pisses me off! I’m going to get a beer!

I can’t say that I’ve been thrilled with how the administration has handled the oil spill crisis myself.

The Memorial Day thing is ridiculous though, since past presidents have done the same thing, including Obama’s antithesis, GWB.

lol, had to know commie Jim would review this and lace it with his own bias…

Well, I HATE politics, so I stay away from Worley. But politics aside…I think this song is melodically boring, and I don’t care for his singing on this track. But then again, I suppose the main appeal to his audience is not so much the music as it is political statements.

“Have You Forgotten” was admittedly flawed in the way it linked Iraq and 9/11, but I see no such “dubious logic” as you called it, in this song. Worley is simply stating that he doesn’t like the current direction the country is taking. It doesn’t matter which administration the bailouts began under; those who were philosophically opposed to the bailouts weren’t defending them during the Bush administration only to argue the other side of the fence when the new regime took over.

To that end, the song celebrates the same dismissal of knowledge and thought that has been steadily creeping into the genre in recent years.

Would that be the same “knowledge and thought” that will put us $2.5 trillion deeper in debt over the next decade?

When Worley preaches that he’s “Just an average joe/So [he’s] smart enough to know…,” he’s downright reveling in the fact that he’s not an intellectual. The sentiment expressed is that it’s better to be dumb and faithful than educated and inquisitive

That’s an elitist statement if ever I heard one, right up there with the Bamster’s “bitter clingers” comments. So people who don’t fall into the category of “intellectuals” are dumb? There are plenty of “average Joes” out there without Ivy League degrees; to dismiss them as stupid is just outrageous.

” It’s not the politics of the particular issue that are cause for unrest here, but the way in which Worley consciously twists the truth in order to support his central theme. ”

I don’t see any evidence of Worley twisting the truth; rather I see you making a rather desperate attempt to find a reason to discredit this song because you don’t share his political point of view.

Oh, and part of that whole “change” that Worley wants us to keep is a system of spending and policies that has lead to job growth and economic indicators showing the economy growing. That seems to be at odds with Worley’s sentiments.

What job growth? Unemployment jumped up to 9.9% in April:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

We could go round and round all day about the actual politics, so I’ll just skip that. I, like other commenters, don’t really see this song as going after Obama or his administration specifically, but the policies in general that are in place, regardless of who put them there.The hook being a term Obama coined is just exploiting a piece of pop-culture. If we can get past convincing ourselves that there are errors in the facts of the song, it’s pretty well written, in my opinion.

I think to say that he’s pandering to his audience is to say that he doesn’t believe in the statement the song makes. Being that, based on interviews and press, we can pretty much know this is a sentiment he actually takes to heart, it changes things for me. Assuming the most recent story Haggard says about it is true, “Okie” is more about pandering than this. But that’s putting a lot of faith in the current story, considering I’ve heard numerous explanations from The Hag.

And Stormy, an economy is pretty cyclical, so to give credit or blame to any one person or policy, to my mind, is rather misguided, but that’s just me talking.

Boy, this song is lame. Pedestrian melody, lazy vocal, weak lyrics.

I agree Lee Ann, and I would respect him a lot more if he said that, but I’ve heard in interviews that it was 1) written in jest of the town name 2) from his fathers perspective and 3) to show the issues through the eyes of a fool. If you’re philosophy changes (i.e. Charlie Daniels from his endorsement of drugs on a lot of albums in the 70′s to his anti-drug stance in “Simple Man”) then just say “hey, I used to think this way, now I see maybe that was flawed.” As Charlie Daniels did do in an interview a few years ago when called out on the differences.

There are only a small handful of Charlie Daniels songs that I like though.

I know you’re like me, which I like, but from the other side of the fence. Isn’t it you who appreciates Todd Snider?

I do love me some Todd Snider, and mostly because, though he’s making fun of me, he’s kind of doing it in a loving way. Like he says, it’s not because his opinions are profound that he shares them, but because they rhyme. I can appreciate someone that has such a live and let live approach.

But I think what he’s getting at is that the problems he mentions are a product of the change. He’s not saying there’s nothing wrong with America, he’s saying we’ve gotten away from what we used to be, and what he believes we were founded to be. The religious persecution, the high taxes, and just the overall increased government involvement in family lives. He’s not worried about the pending doom on the horizon, he’s worried about the ball that’s already started rolling.

Like I said earlier, I don’t see his using the slogan as necessarily indicting Obama. Just the same, there’s the health care bill that most conservatives aren’t very fond of. There’s Obama’s claim to be a christian, yet his efforts to make sure that every faith is welcome, excluding christians. Like I said, there’s no need to get into the meat of the politics here. I agree with most of what he’s trying to say here, so I’m going to see his points as more authentic and based in reality. Since you don’t agree with them, you’re going to see it as paranoia or alarmist or whichever adjective you choose. :)

In all reality, I know most political discussions can just go around in circles because each side typically remains unconvinced, since they’re coming from different mindsets.

I’m certain that this song will be popular among a large demographic of mainstream country fans, since they typically lean conservative. I’m resigned to that.

So, what it really comes down to for me is that I wish political songs at least had other things besides the lyric to keep me interested. For instance, I didn’t like “Shuttin’ Detroit Down” at all when John Rich sang it, but John Anderson’s version works just fine for me and is even on my iPod.

Another issue that I have with this particular song is that the structure is odd in places. It seems that he tries to jam too much into a line so that it ends up sounding awkward. I’m cool with that when a song is meant to be quirky, but I’m doubting that was the intention of this composition.

I wouldn’t choose either of those adjectives, actually.

Razorx, you said “Have You Forgotten” was admittedly flawed in the way it linked Iraq and 9/11. Who admitted that it was flawed? That song never links 9-11 to Iraq. The song was written and released before that war, it was written about the war in Afghanistan. Reading before you speak can be a good thing.

It seems to me this song is calling out the Left and the Right, our Government as a whole. For anyone to assume this song is saying that nothing needs to be changed is a moron and is missing the point. This song captures what middle America is feeling right now, me included. I don’t like the thought of throwing the whole country under the bus (financially speaking) to make sure 7% of Americans have health insurance. Middle Americans can’t understand why the Government can’t get a grip on spending. HAS ANY ONE IN WASHINGTON EVER THOUGHT OF CUTTING SPENDING INSTEAD OF VOTING THEMSELVES A RAISE WHILE PASSING A $780,000,000,000 STIMULUS PACKAGE?!? And the list goes on.

Thank you Darryl Worley.

I’ve been following you on the other thread and I only agree with you to a point there. I love to tear a lyric apart in reviews, but as a listener, it really is the production and melody that first captures my attention. If I don’t like either of those, I really don’t even make it to the lyrics. However, there are definitely times when I think the lyric is lame or a message that I don’t agree with, but I can love the song anyway. So, while I think it’s fine that this particular review doesn’t focus on that, I think it’s relevant to this thread. Also, even Rick has said that he’d like this song if not for not liking those factors that you say “add nothing to the discourse surrounding the song.”: “I wish I could like this song more, but it’s musical structure just isn’t that interesting” (from the Resident Rush Limbaugh Republican)

Malec said, “Political statements like “Keep The Change” make it easy to rally behind a flag of patriotism, but they offer no help in developing a national discourse that encourages respectful, well-reasoned debate.”

Sorry if rallying around the flag offends you Malec.

They drive on the left side of the road in England. Mayne that is where you should go for your respectful debate.

Leeann,

First of all, you can disregard such a musically uneducated comment that Malec just made.

You are dead-on with your comment about production and melody. These are the “hooks” that capture a listener’s attention. It is the opening guitar rift on “Sweet Home Alabama” by Skynyrd that immediately arrests the attention and the following melody throughout.

I am big on lyrics but the music is key. On Jamey Johnson’s “In Color”, which is without a doubt one of the greatest songs of the past decade, the melody of the song sets the mood. It’s a great combination.

As far as Malec’s review, if the song would have had a liberal bent, well – you know the rest.

Well, it is Rick we’re talking about. For him, that’s quite a concession.:)

As far as your question for me, I can’t say. You probably know that I personally don’t get into instrumentals, but I do like a good number. On the same token, I don’t like a capella either. For me, melody, production and lyric are importan, not to mention emotion conveyed by voice. However, production and melody is what I notice first as strictly a listener. As a reviewer, the story is different, though my bias toward melody and production still surfaces.

The road is probably the only thing that Nick Clegg is on the left side of.

I worked hard for my education. I am the first person in my family to graduate from college. I’m not ashamed of my education, or my intellect, and if you think that makes me elitist…well, too bad.

I worked hard fro my education, too, Jim, as did a lot of other people. Being proud of one’s education doesn’t make one an elitist but calling people who have less education dumb, does.

Ah, but I didn’t dismiss them as stupid. What I said is that the narrator “revel[s] in the fact that he’s not an intellectual. The sentiment expressed is that it’s better to be dumb and faithful than educated and inquisitive.”

I want you to tell me where in that paragraph you see me dismissing Average Joes as stupid.

That would be the part where you equate people who don’t consider themselves intellectuals as “dumb and faithful” as opposed to “educated and inquisitive”. Because no one who is educated could possibly have a different point of view, right??

Choosing not to self-reference as an “intellectual” is not the same as implying that intellectualism is inferior to “common sense.” The implication made in this song is that intellect is subordinate to common sense–and that “intellectualism” is an undesirable attribute. If intellectualism is an undesirable attribute, and intellectualism is defined as the use of the intellect, then I don’t understand how this doesn’t say, “the less intellectual you are, the better off you are.”

Clearly, Worley is using the term “intellectual” to describe people who have academic credentials but not a lot of practical, real world experience — like the kind of people who are running things in DC at the moment, the kind of people who have theories about how things ought to be done, but who have never put those theories into practice. The average Joes, on the other hand, have the practical experience but not necessarily the academic credentials.

What Worley is not doing is using your definition of intellectualism as the use of the intellect. He’s certainly not telling people not to think or use their brains. I find it difficult to believe that you don’t already know that, so as far as being disingenous is concerned, right back at ya.

Razor: Obama got his start as a community orgainzer. That job is, entirely, putting theories into practice.

Also, one per did point out that Bin Laden was not a priority. Dick Cheney.

I actually like “Where Were You” as a melody, though it’s very simple. It definitely sticks in my head.

I like Darryl Worley’s new song “keep the change.” I love my country but its true there are alot of things that have changed that make me not like the way my country is right now. I was in the military until this past april. My husband is in the military, people should really look at whats happening.

it’s best to remember that at the heart of conservatism is smaller government.

No, that’s at the heart of libertarianism. There are lots of strains of conservatism (and, for that matter, liberalism) in American history, and plenty of them are in favor of using government power in various ways.

I didn’t say no government, I said smaller government. I don’t know many conservatives that would say they prefer having the government involved in as many facets of theirs lives as possible.

keep the change, barrack obama ran his presidency campaign on change, if you people cannot see that then you are just a stupid average joe

Relative to music with lyrics.

Why, then, it’s not a point about country music at all, is it? In which case your statements about how country music in particular is inhospitable to instrumental music are just worthless distractions from a thoroughly banal main point. Thanks for clearing that up.

And thanks for the diversionary speculation on the marketing of Play. I stand corrected insofar as it is not literally all-instrumental, just overwhelmingly so, and anxiously await your list of recent overwhelmingly-instrumental albums by stars comparable to Paisley in the pop and rock fields, along with your responses to all the other evidentiary items I brought up.

And by the way, having listened to the song yet again, I can say with some confidence that the alleged revelry in the fact of not being an intellectual is wholly a product of Jim’s imagination. In no respect whatsoever does the actual lyric content justify his claim that the song expresses a belief that it’s better to be “dumb and faithful” than “educated and inquisitive.”

Don’t get me wrong, I think this is a genuinely crappy (and, since I generally like Worley, therefore a disappointing) song, made even more so by my belief that there could actually have been a fairly clever and pointed song written around the “keep the change” coinceit. But this bit of Jim’s critique is just plain wrong – as wrong as the song’s ahistorical invocation of the Founding Fathers..

@Idlewildsouth “No government” is anarchism; small government is libertarian. There have certainly been libertarian strains in American conservatism, but they’re not the only ones. And I don’t know of many liberals who want government involved in as many aspects of their lives as possible either, so I guess we can leave that out of the picture. There are certainly plenty of conservatives who believe in a vigorous projection of US power abroad, which requires a bigger government than would otherwise be the case; there are certainly plenty of conservatives who believe that government ought to be policing various aspects of behavior, which requires a bigger government than would otherwise be the case; there are certainly plenty of conservatives who believe that government’s power ought to be deployed on the side of corporate owners in their conflicts with organized labor. I could go on, but won’t. The point is that the “smaller government” mantra has historically been far more the leitmotif of a more coherent libertarianism than a more heterogenous conservatism.

I get tired of any artist who seems to have only one card to play, and Darryl Worley certainly seems to fall into that category. I don’t care what the message is, if you only have one and you’ve played it again and again, I’m tired of it (Toby Keith is another who has gotten this way, although he wasn’t early in his career).

Jim, this is the best review I’ve read not only from your collection, but of all time on this site. Thank you for nodding those of us who are empowered with knowledge rather than vague dogma, and respecting the thinking man rather than the faithful patriot.

The real shame of this song is, Worley has much more talent to offer than this or “Have You Forgotten”. From time to time I pull up his albums on my Ipod and there are some really great album cuts on his early stuff that show a lot of promise.

Throughout the years, I’ve been a fan of Darryl Worley. Have You Forgotten is a great song, and Keep the Change is a decent addition to his catalog. Not as good as Have You Forgotten, I think, but pretty good none-the-less.
The message is, of course, spot on. This country has been undermined by liberalism for years, and Obama is just the perfect pinheaded idiot that unreasoning liberals have been looking for to spearhead their assault on core American values. Shame on liberals, and shame on those that sit idly by and let them ruin what the forefathers of this country created. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!

Here’s Merle Haggard talking in Esquire about country music and what he thinks it needs. His point is he thinks a good storyteller, who can write good music, will always breakthrough. Merle’s been known to come up with a pretty good story. But listen to him and it’s obvious he works just as hard on the music and melodies, too. Here’s what he said:

“If only somebody could sing a song, had something to say, had a good melody, and could do it in person, without help from any electronics. I think the people would go nuts.”

The real shame of this song is, Worley has much more talent to offer than this or “Have You Forgotten”.

Dang straight.

Jim, you have specifically argued that “especially” (emphasis in original) in country music, lyrics are more important than music. You have said that “the vast majority of contemporary country music is produced from a narrative, lyric-centric standpoint” (though what evidence you could offer as to what’s occurring at the vast majority of contemporary songwriting appointments is an interesting question to ponder); you’ve said “it makes sense to consider the lyrics as being somewhat more important than the track when reviewing the whole” with respect to country songs; you’ve said that “the ‘sound’ of the song works only subordinately to the lyrics” with respect to country music in particular; and you’ve said “I think that when people listen to country music, they generally hear the lyrics first and the music second.” All of which assertions implicitly or explicitly make a claim about how country music stacks up against other genres, and not just a claim about the relative preference for songs over instrumental works among country listeners (who, in that respect, are pretty much the same as listeners to most popular musical styles). And none of which assertions have much to back them up.

So that’s point one: I am not making up the notion that you believe that in country music, lyrics are more important than music, and that whereas the belief that country records use a lot of musical cliches justifies saying nothing about the music, the belief that country records use a lot of lyric cliches is worth repeated and sometimes lengthy exploration (in other words, that the details of lyric cliches are worth exploring, whereas the details of musical cliches are not). If that’s not what you believe, then you are doing a bad job of explaining yourself.

Point number two is this: you seem to believe that only alternatives to believing that lyrics are more important than music are believing that music is more important than lyrics, or that they are equally important. And though another alternative has been pointed out several times, you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge its existence – namely, the notion that a song consists of *both* elements *interacting*, and that the interaction is ultimately where the song’s identity resides. Why do you so resolutely avoid this notion?

I hate reading Jim Malec’s reviews. They are so darn insightful that they make MY single reviews look bad by comparison. And yet, for some reason, I eagerly read each new one that he publishes. The fact that Darryl is sending contradictory messages never even would have occurred to me, but it’s a very good point.

this song is really a last ditch effort for Worley to get radio play….sad….if i wanted to hear politics on the radio i would listen to talk radio…

For you true liberals out there, I suggest you read our Founding Document (the Declaration of Independence) and our Governing Document ( the Constitution) and Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto and Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Then you may come to understand that your beloved Democrat Party has been taken-over by radical Marxists.

Mr. Malec’s asinine false dichotomy “better to be dumb and faithful than educated and inquisitive”. In fact some of the most educated and inquisitive people in history were and are people of faith. The Founding Fathers of this country were people of faith. The song is not promoting being “dumb”. What is your problem, really, Mr. Malec? If anyone seems dumb to me, it’s you!

While some of the Founding Fathers may have been religious, they were not in the sense that modern Evangelical Protestants are. for those from the Southern colonies, the Church of England remained the most powerful religious institution, though Methodism and the Baptist faith was creeping in on the frontier. In New England, Puritanism had waned, and Protestantism was in flux. And lets be clear, its not Christianity we are talking about with the Founding Fathers, its only Protestantism. There was deep seated anti-Catholicism throughout the colonies.
If some of the men who created the Constitution, why then they insist in the Bill of Rights of the separation of church and state? In part, because the “tyranny” of England had soured Americans on official religions (remember that in Great Britain, the king or queen is not only the head of state, but the head of the faith as well.) When members of the assembly of the state of Virginia proposed in 1785 public funds be used for teaching Christianity, James Madison (the writer of most of the constitution and Jefferson’s protege), violently denounced it, calling those lawmakers in favor “tyrants” while “the People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves no by an authority derived from them, and are slaves.” (Note the irony from the slaveholder Madison.) Madison wanted to protect the people from having religion imposed upon them, even if it was the faith of the majority. Which I find hard to argue against.

“…why then they insist in the Bill of Rights of the separation of church and state?”

Nothing in the Constitution says that there is a separation between religion and government.

The First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The objective was to prohibit the federal government from establishing a national religion.

That line was not directed at you, steve m., but rather “luckyoldsun”.

“…if everything in America is so good that nothing needs to be changed…” Mr. Malec sets up a ridiculous Straw Man, then proceeds to tear it down. This is supposed to show how smart he is? It doesn’t show any smarts whatsoever. It’s a stupid tactic frequently used by leftist ideologues, and so it is used here by this one.

Of course some things need improvement. But we patriots do not want to FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE or FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORM America. The words I capitalized are the ones repeatedly used by Obama and other Marxists like him.

Why don’t you show us how to write a song Jim Malec? You tell everyone else how to do it but can you do it yourself. Let us hear the music you’ve created using your extraordinary musical knowledge. You appoint your self judge and jury over others music but what are your qualifications? If you really possess the knowledge to write great music don’t horde up all for yourself. That’s not the obama way. Spread the musical wealth you profess to own by writing us a song and playing it here on 9513.
There is an old saying those who can do, those who can’t teach. Which is it? Are you really an expert and can walk the talk or just frustrated wannabe who lives to criticize everyone else.. Play us your song Malec!
Meet the challenge and show us your true self. Put up or shut up. Coward or composer. Which one are you really Jim?

Rick: And, Obama is an absolute turd for skipping the Memorial Day ceremonies in DC to go on vacation!

Wisest thing said on this page so far. Every President that skips it is a turd for doing so. Dumb turds.

Has anyone heard the song “Angel Flight” by Radney Foster? That’s something really powerful, and should make Worley feel ashamed for using “those who died” as a sound-byte for an attack on a politician.

Lucas, my bad, you did say “every president.”

Read the link at snoopes that Gary Zarda posted. George H missed all four. The Vice President will be at the one in DC while Obama give a speech in Illinois at a National Cemetery. As long as he honors the fallen where he is really doesn’t matter.

And by the way, why does this song equate placing one’s hand over one’s heart when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance with honoring American war casualties? A non sequitur like that isn’t a promising way to start off a song.
(And BTW, searching for an explanation for that particular action led to some rather interesting stuff, including the fact that Marxist Communist Socialist Hard Left President Franklin Roosevelt was the guy responsible for its institution. See, for instance, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute .)

Yes, as long as he honors the fallen is the key. I would be upset if a president didn’t honor in some way on Memorial day, but this one is. Why does it have to be in Washington to mean something?

Observer: What war are you banging on about now? This country is already engaged in three costly and ill advised wars–we can’t afford another one.

Good one, Leeann!

Just did listen to “Angel Flight,” Joe. Is of higher quality.

And lest we forget that Brad was all so giddy from bowing to Obama while he was singing his Obama song to Obama at The White House that he wrote about Obama.

Maybe Brad ought to join Tim McGraw and Sammy Kershaw and try running for something.

No true conservative suggests taking Social Security and Medicare away from those who rely on the programs now. After all, they were promised the benefits and paid into the programs. But both programs, as they are currently designed are clearly unsustainable. Future generations of Americans will need other solutions for their later years.
And, well, how about you leftists out there: Are you really going to rely on the government (in particular Social Security and Medicare programs that you are paying into now) to take care of you in your old age? No? Why not?

I’m referring to people who claim that the administrations that gave us programs like Social Security and Medicare were “socialist,” “Marxist,” and so on.

Hey now, copying and pasting from infoplease.com is called plagiarism and I will not have it in this class! It’s as good as cheating!

Observer: That doesn’t mitigate the fact that The New Deal was good and helped a lot of people. That just means that Internment Camps were bad.

To state that “The New Deal was good and helped a lot of people” is debatable. I’m inclined to believe that FDR helped to turn a recession into the “Great Depression” with his policies. At any rate, he greatly increased the power of the Federal government and set the country on a course of ever-increasing governmental intrusion into all of our lives.

Unlike Observer, I don’t care whether Swift’s live performances are good or not. I listen to Swift on my car radio and sometimes my radio at home. I enjoy hearing her music on the radio but have no desire to see her in concert or watch her on an country music awards show (I have no desire to watch such shows at all) or any other live performance. Her live performances are irrelevant to me. All I care about is that the singles I hear from her on radio sound fine, and I have no problems with them.

Did Obama visit the people in Tennessee after the flood? No! Did Obama visit the Gulf Coast after the oil spell? No! He did eventually but he took his sweet time in doing so like the liberal he is. He would rather take his family on vacation more and help foreign countries than he wants to help everyone here in the United States.

I just read on the net that the BP said that the oil plug didn’t help at all. You all wanted “change” with Obama? Well, you got it and a “change” for the worse from what I see and it’s going to get even worse.

Well, there is another thing that really bugs me about Ms. Swift, and that is the re-mixing of her studio recordings. But I’ve written at length about this topic on more than one occasion and won’t repeat now.

C’mon, “Stormy”, this is really pathetic, or maybe pathological, I’m not sure. Do you really think that Bush & Cheney are in any way responsible for the oil spill? What is this “corrupt system” you refer to? That must be the government regulators, because the oil industry is one of the most regulated industries. Look, accidents happen, and no amount of government regulation will eliminate them. Remember Chornobyl? That all occurred under one of the most regulated systems the world has ever seen.
What is it that you do anyway? Do you work at a company that produces anything? Have you ever? The companies that you so willfully demonize employ thousands of people, private citizens, who work hard every day to produce the energy resources that the country relies upon. This oil spill, bad as it is, represents an infinitesimal percentage of the oil that has been successfully recovered from the Gulf. BTW, you too are free to buy a few shares of BP and Haliburton or any publicly traded company and participate in the Capitalist system that has provided wealth for millions of people, ordinary people, and made this country the economic powerhouse that it is.

Yes, I do think that Cheney was largely responsible for the complete disentrigation of the MMS, if for no other reason than he set a horrible example. I mean, if he could take money from Haliburton while his government was granting them contracts, why would employees of the MMS think it would be wrong for them to do so?

Stormy, Obama has dragged his feet over the whole oil spill mess ever since it happened over a month ago. His appearance yesterday in New Orleans didn’t help either in just that it was one of his many photo ops and interruptions of TV shows just to give him some excuse to be on the airwaves. That’s what Obama has been about from day 1 as President. He doesn’t care what people want or need just another bleeding heart liberal with no guts and no glory. He promises the moon and everything else but what do you get in return? I’m just tired of his so-called change with nothing to show for it.

Observer, it wasn’t the little man on that oil rig that caused that oil spill. It was the greed of the management who risked lives and destruction to make a buck. Nobody’s demonizing the worker. Watch the clips below to get a sense of who’s to blame.

http://news.spreadit.org/60-minutes-oil-spill/

Lewis: What exactly should he have done with the oil spill?

What was he supposed to have done?

Malec is disgracing this blog. Not for his political views as mush as his admittance to them when reviewing songs and his typical high-hat approach that liberals often take.

Malec, take you feel good and go down south and clean up the oil spill with volunteer labor.

Stormy: Obama should have done something with BP’s handling of the oil spill from the get go instead of dragging his feet and making excuses and waiting over a month just to come to New Orleans for a couple of hours and making false promises. He should have met with the people who are going to be out of jobs in the fishing industry and other industries along the Gulf of Mexico helping them get through this instead of the same old tired excuses he gives all the time. Now if it was another country in the same mess as we are (Africa, Norway, Mexico, South America, etc.) he would have hopped on that plane so fast your head would spin and he would have helped them quicker than he would here. He rather would spend his time in foreign countries than he would in the United States where he is supposedly President of the United States not “President of the Whole Wide World”.

As an assignment: Why not put in Peggy Joseph on Google or YouTube and you’ll find out what she said that Obama was going to do for her when he was running for President in 2008. She made it look like that Obama was Jesus Christ saying that he was going to pay her bills, get her a job, a car, etc. Wonder what she thinks of her Messiah now that she has learned that his promises didn’t come through for her.

I hope that Darryl’s song goes to #1. It deserves that and more.

If I thought political discourse in this country didn’t get any better than this, I’d shoot myself right now.

f I thought political discourse in this country didn’t get any better than this, I’d shoot myself right now.

What do we have to do to convince you that it really doesn’t get any better than this?

Stormy: It seems that you want to ask the same question over and over again about what Obama is supposed to do about the oil spill and I told you how I felt but as typical of a liberal like you you refuse to listen to what I have to say so in conclusion I will just say that we agree to disagree on this so I’m not going to answer you anymore about it since you believe what you want to believe about Obama and his walking on the water for you and him being perfect in your eyes regardless on how wrong he is on everything. My posts about Obama and everything speak for themselves. Let someone else explain it to you about it. Maybe someone on here will sink some reality into your head yet.

Great post, FaceTheMusic!! I agree with everything that you say and more. Our United States government under Obama is the worst ever thanks to the broken promises and mistakes he has made as President. We can thank the Democrats for putting us even deeper in debt than ever before. Unemployment is 10%, gas prices are up between 50 cents to a dollar more than last year, and yet our government keeps spending wastefully on what I call junk bills which are things that amount to nothing. Obama should be out looking for jobs for people and helping them instead of taking vacations and going over to foreign countries where they hate the United States.

Darryl Worley tells it like it is. “Keep The Change” because I don’t like the change that is going on in the United States.

It’s seems Jim Malec refuses to answer those who question his musical credentials. I can see why he is an obama fan. They are a lot alike. They both make big talk and love to get on their soap box and criticize others but do nothing themselves. They whine and moan about what’s wrong and point fingers and blame everybody else for all the woes in the world but DO NOTHING THEMSELVES. They do nothing because they know nothing. They are ignorant and clueless, blinded not by lack of intelligence but by arrogance and pride. They are “self-appointed” experts with no credentials to back their “expertise”. They see themselves as saviors of the underprivileged but in reality they are like fungus, like leeches and ticks who live off of others efforts. Building themselves up by tearing others down. They exist by sucking the life blood out of others who produce and create something by art or commerce yet they both produce NOTHING but hot air. Show me a body of work, of actual hands on product either of them has ever created in and of themselves and I’ll apologize from the bottom of my heart but if you can’t show it to me then they should crawl back in the holes they slimed out of.

Americans are so confusing..Obama might be skipping the arlington memorial but he will be going to the memorial in Chicago…which is doing THE SAME THING HE’D BE DOING AT THE MEMORIAL IN ARLINGTON…it’s about honouring the dead, not which memorial you attend, and don’t tell me it’s tradition, it might be to you but it seems like you all just need a reason to bring him down

it’s also funny when righties want the government to do less but yet when something happens like nashvilles flood or gulf spill they expect the lefties to be on it pronto!

way the hypocrisy?

Given that the complaints fly fast and furious when the Oba administration does something (e.g., push through health insurance reform), it seems a little disingenuous when the complainers also whine that the administration’s done nothing.

The debate isn’t about whether the federal government should ALWAYS do more or ALWAYS do less; it’s about what the appropriate role of the federal government is under certain situations. Sending in the Army Corp of Engineers would have been an appropriate response to the oil spill in Louisiana. Argung that they should have been called in, while opposing goverment intrusion into other aspects of our lives (i.e., healthcare) is in no way inconsistent.

the american dream: the widespread aspiration of Americans to live better than their parents did…
according to most of you nuts this dream only exists to america…not canada, european countries, australia, new zealand…nooo, just america
the ignorance most of you show to the rest of the world is incredible

@Razor X. Aren’t you the guy who spent several posts trying to explain and defend Worley’s use of the words “intellectual” or “intellectualism” without noticing that he had used neither one?

@Razor X. The point is that you’re not a reliable observer of what “the debate” is about. This time around, you’ve lost sight of the fact that there are mutliple “debates” on multiple subjects. The hypocrisy I’ve noted is real and may be found in various posts here, as may statements about the “American dream” that you’ve also missed.

Darryl Worley is criticizing our president during wartime. Why does he hate American so much? Why does he want the terrorists to win?

Obviously radio stations everywhere will be leading large groups of people to burn his photos and crush he CDs under bulldozers.

Lewis: Actually, my point is that everyone says that someone should have done something abotu the Gulf Oil Spill sooner, but no one has the first clue what that something should be. Maybe because once you have an well a mile down spewing oil into the ocean there is not a lot you can do. BP is losing $15,540,000 just in oil profits. If there were a quick and easy soluion, don’t you think they would have tried it?

Good lord, Waynoe. Posters have made you look stupid again and again in this debate, and rather than debating Jim’s actual arguments, you just spew angry personal diatribes at him. In a nutshell, you are why I cannot support the Republican party despite being economically conservative. You are stubborn, angry, intellectually lazy, and have no apparent interest in debating what would actually be best for our country.

I think it is incredible niave to think that discipline, hard work, drive and ambition turns you into a Donald Trump or a Hilton. This country is full of poor people who bust their asses every day at a job, and the wealth of “dreamers” like Hilton and Trump are made off of their backs. How much do you think Paris’ inheritance would be cut if her granddaddy paid every maid in his hotels a living wage? And how many people do you think would stay in those hotels if those maids weren’t there to do their jobs.

My dream is to earn enough to live on, be happy and file for bankruptcy fewer times than Donald Trump. Every week I play the lottery in the hopes I will be able to win 100,000,000 dollars so I can give it back to poor people.

Inspiring individual stories notwithstanding, the best predictor of your education, income and social status is the education, income and social status of your parents.

“Let them eat platitudes.”

But seriously, you’re sounding an awful lot like Barack Obama.

Ah, I see. The solution to poverty is to give all the poor people million dollar screen contracts. Of course, we all know how well that worked out for Nicolas Cage.

Is this the same Nicolas Cage who is the nephew of Francis Ford Coppola, the director among things The Godfather trilogy? I would say that was a big help in starting a career in Hollywood.

Also, the same Nicholas Cage who is now bankrupt.

Oh and Face, there are millions of people out there working 40 hours a weeks making people like Donald Trump wealthy who live hand to mouth, some of whom cannot afford a place to live.

I don’t care if Waynoe is a high school dropout or a Harvard PhD. What I do care about is the quality of his posts here. And they rarely contribute much at all to the discussion at hand. Waynoe very well may be a highly educated person but said education rarely if ever can be seen beneath the (quite thick) veneer of personal attacks, pettiness, dogmatism, and inane remarks that pepper his comments.

Congratulations to the conservative posters at this blog. You’re doing a good job of confronting the Marxists. It’s hard work, I know, but keep in mind the hard work and sacrifice put forth by our Founding Fathers. This November is critically important. We need to take control of the Republican Party: it’s the only way we’re going to defeat the Radicals that have taken-over the Democrat Party. No “Third Party” will do it. It has never worked. We MUST use the Republican Party as our vehicle. And we MUST be very careful about the Republicans we elect. There are lots of phonies out there. Don’t be fooled. We need to elect CONSERVATIVE Republicans.

I think the recommendation to read the Constitution is a good one – and don’t forget to read the Amendments, too. The amendment process is part of why it’s idiotic to argue against the notion that it’s a “living document.”. I would also advise reading James Madison’s notes from the Constitutional Convention, as they ate the best record of what the Founding Fathers thought of the document they were writing.

As for the rest, it’s evident that observer has read neither the Manifesto nor Alinsky’s book, which suggests that the recommendations there ought to be taken with a large grain of salt.

as for marxism, it would be true to say the reason the banking and housing market collapsed was because everyone was greedy, banks would hand out 200,000 dollar loans to people who were working part time at Mcdonalds and they accepted it…not knowing, hey I won’t be able to pay this back because I only make 12,000 dollars a year
and then the same people whined about the governments bailouts, the average joes who were too stupid to know how to think collapsed the economy with their capitalistic greed

Oh I see, people can trash liberals all they want but I can’t do the same to republicans?

nice editing the9513, yeah, freedom of speech my ass

Jon is quite correct. If “Observer” has read Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto and Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I will eat my guitar.

Paul & Waynoe

Personally, I think “Keep the Change” is a below-average song with a boring melody, decent instrumentation, poorly written lyrics that largely lack cohesion (mainly because not only do they seem to jump around from one right-wing cliche to another with little in the way of logic connecting them, but in places, they contradict each other–Jim actually points this out in his review), and a pedestrian vocal from a gifted singer. This one’s a thumbs down for me all the way. There are plenty of good conservative songs out there to listen to; this is just not one of them.

I didn’t like this song either. Country music is not and should not be a forum for engaging in political debate. Country music should be universal. It should be about emotions that we all can relate to. By releasing a song that slams President Obama, Darryl will alienate those who support Obama. It should also be noted that this is the third political-themed song of Darryl’s career. Thus, he would do well to expand his artistic repertoire to include a variety of other themes as well, especially considering the fact that he has not had an outstanding number of hits to begin with.

Whether it should be is, I guess, debatable, but it has been a forum for politics for just about as long as it’s been around, and that’s just a fact.

Well as long as Rick’s been around…LOL!

This from the Dept.of Defense:”WASHINGTON, May 28, 2007 – Evoking the memories of citizens who died defending America throughout history and urging a new generation to safeguard freedoms for which previous generations made sacrifices, President Bush commemorated Memorial Day at Arlington National Cemetery here today.”

On May 27, 2002, Bush did not go to Arlington National Cemetery because he was in Europe, attending week-long meetings with foreign leaders.

On that Memorial Day, he attended a Memorial Day Service at a church in Sainte Mere-Eglise, France, where he offered some remarks. Then he commemorated Memorial Day at the Normandy American Cemetery, where 9,000 Americans are buried, and spoke eloquently again.
In 2002, he did not blow off Arlington to go on vacation. He was quite busy, as you can see from the above. Why make stuff up when it is easily verified?

Waynoe, I have neither the time nor the desire to do anything like that with you.

How about, instead, you take the time to quote selections of Malec’s review that you disagree with, and provide a compelling argument why? He does Worley that courtesy in analyzing his song, you could at least do him the same.

Repeatedly posting vague, angry, bitter personal attacks contributes nothing to this discussion or this site. If you honestly think you’re right and he’s wrong, quote the section of the review and make a legitimate argument.

Perhaps we have all missed the point…who cares about the president in particular. The point of the song is to keep God, GUNs, and money in the bank. This song is about the reinterpretation of the constitution of the United States of America that is systematically taking away our rights that we have fought and bled and died for.

Yes, our government has said that some people make too much money and that there needs to be a redistribution of the wealth…I don’t know about you, but I’m a police officer, I go to work every day knowing that there is a very real possibility that I will not come home. I don’t like that the government is going to take more and more of the money I EARN to take care of the criminals I fight…If you think it doesn’t happen then go and talk to your local police officers and they’ll break it down for you.

The Governement has already tried to reinterpret your 2nd and 14th ammendment rights…you know the ones that allow you to arm yourself against attacks and the one that says that the constitution governs the government as well as the people…oh, and there are many politicians in DC right now trying to overturn these rights.

And God…If you don’t already know about the continuing saga of whether the 1st ammendment includes Christianity or not then I suggest you start reading the news…try the Drudge Report.

I’m going to leave it with that…Those of you criticizing this song should consider that it makes some very valid points that perhaps the change that is occurring is undermining the basic fabric of our nation and working to deny us of our basic rights.

Jim,

Before you respond to “the government forcing citizens to purchase government healthcare” let me say this. This will happen.

The government is saying that a government healthcare plan will create competition, which it will for a while. But the playing field isn’t level. When you force private insurance companies to insure everyone with pre-existing illness and keep a lid on premium increases one by one those companies will fail. Mathematics will tell you that a private company cannot stay in business like that. But the government thinks it can and that is insanity. Then, just like everything else our government runs, the waste, fraud and corruption will creep in forcing taxpayers to pay for it all. Less efficiency and higher cost, that’s what our government does best.

Change.

Fortunately for God, there’s the left wing to offer him the proper respect.

I don’t know that God necessarily wants to be kept in the bank. Jesus had some pretty unflattering opinions of money lenders.

Jon,

Just asking, but why do YOU suppose that it was so important to our founding fathers that every citizen have the right to bear arms? It is well documented that they thought each person should have the right to protect themselves. Considering the revolution they had just fought through with an overbearing government, their words of wisdom speak of experience.

Thomas Jefferson once said “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms”.

Benjamin Franklin said “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”.

Zacharia Johnson argued that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression because:
“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them”.

The more I read the more obvious it becomes that they hoped the government that they started would never grow into the monster that it is today. What an incredible show of faith and strength it took for them to stand up to the tyranny of their government.

I don’t think there will ever be another generation of leaders as wise or as strong. At the close of the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was asked what type of government we will now have, a republic or monarchy, to which he replied “a republic if you can keep it”.

Maybe if you read a little more about our history you might have more understanding for the laws our founding fathers put in place and why.

Change.

I beg to differ with you. It is very well documented that our founding fathers felt very strongly in their right to bear arms to defend themselves. Those were just 3 examples I gave. If you like I can waste my time finding more but what is the point.

You said “Neither did they write the Second Amendment in order to guarantee individuals the ability take up arms against the government any time they individually decided that the government had become a “monster.”

They had just fought off the king’s army with very guns they believed in keeping for protection you moron. I can’t believe how stupid you must be to think the right to bear arms wouldn’t be important to them. There would be no United States of America if our founding fathers had not had arms to bear.

And just because you call someone “buster” (pause for laughter) doesn’t help your cause in trying to appear intelligent. Try reading some more, knowledge just might change your mind. That is if you find any “buster”. (Sorry, more laughter).

Change.

If one reads through the thoughts of our founding fathers it appears that they not only believed very strongly in the right to bear arms to protect themselves against others, but equally to protect themselves from the tyranny of an aggressive government. That is not surprising (except to all the “busters” out there) considering the fight they had just gone through for their freedom.

What’s funny is I’m not even a gun owner, I just truly believe in the right to have one. And more importantly I believe in what the ones who started this country had to say about it because they represent the voice of reason and experience.

It is well documented as well that the founding fathers believed in “small” government, a government which would not intrude on freedom. A limited government. Not exactly what we have today.

Change.

Some good points Sam.

My posts were to present facts as to it being well documented that our founding fathers intended for us to have the right to bear arms to protect ourselves, which it does. This was really to rebut Jon in his assumption that “That is not well documented at all, mostly because it isn’t true”.

Many believe that private citizens should no longer have this right. At the current time there is “talk” of putting it on the table for discussion. James Madison said he believed the loss of freedom would come “by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

I don’t have a problem in gun regulation at all, having record of gun owners is a good thing. I’m not sure how one can think that gun ownership could fall under simply “tradition” though. It has been woven in the fabric of our country from the beginning and as stated by the founding fathers, is what separates us from weaker nations. We would still be a part of England without arms, it’s more than tradition.

The whole point of bearing arms is to prevent crime, that can’t possibly be done through a police force and a dis-armed citizenry. Criminals are by definition “law breakers”, can we expect them to turn in their guns if citizenry is disarmed? That’s a naive thought.

Change.

There’s truth in that Stormy. We need to get the guns out or the hands of the criminals, not law abiding citizens.

Change.

Not all change is bad. Back in the 1980′s one of the teacher and her husband were expecting a child. The school board wanted to ban her from teaching once she started showing. They said it was immoral for her to stand in front of her students.

There was a time when not everyone could eat at the same lunch counter , drink from the same fountain or use the same restroom.

Dunno about anyone else, but in my part of the world, cutting & pasting quotes – some of them butchered (like the Madison and Adams ones), others outright fabricated (like the George Washington one)- from a bunch of gun nut websites doesn’t really constitute reading what the founding fathers had to say about the Second Amendment or anything else.

Furthermore, FaceTheMusic, you are still waffling back and forth between two claims. One is that the writers of the Second Amendment wanted to guarantee that individuals (like Timothy McVeigh, for instance), could engage in armed insurrection against the federal government whenever they decided that government was tyrannical, which proposition is an extreme distortion; and the other is that the writers of the Second Amendment wanted to guarantee that individuals could keep firearms to use against criminals, for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

If you think that individuals ought to be able to arm themselves in order to play judge, jury and executioner whenever they please, FaceTheMusic, you’re free to do so. But that’s not what the Second Amendment was written for. Not even close.

Facethemusic: What Jon is getting at is the second ammendment is quiet specific.

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

So which well-regulated militia do you belong to?

Jon,

No offense but we’re gonna have to agree to disagree. I do get it, you don’t, but nice library.

Kyle, thank you. I see a grave threat on several levels with government run healthcare.

For a while it will be good as it will create competition for consumers. Cost will be lower and uninsurable citizens will be able to get healthcare. But because only the government has the ability to operate while losing money one by one private insurance companies will fail. Then government mismanagement, waste and fraud will set in (as in EVERY other thing government runs) and costs will go up. Government will start looking for ways to get the cost and efficiency under control. At this point government will have 4 choices:

Decide which patients need what procedures the most and ration accordingly
Raise taxes
Borrow or just print more money
Lower the pay of doctors, nurses, etc.
Probably all 4

Despite what the media says we have the best healthcare in the world. They spout off statistics on how we rank down the list as far as infant mortality and the like and the sad truth is that is localized mostly in inner cities where there’s a large number of poor people who don’t get good healthcare. That’s truly a shame. But when people are in need of a specialist such as heart, brain, etc., they travel here from all over the world because we live in a free market where a doctor can earn what he or she is worth. The best doctors are here in the USA.

By the way, doctor’s salary caps are already being discussed in this plan. How many people are gonna want to go to college and rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for medical school while being told they can only make $75,000/year (hypothetically).

With thirty million more people in the healthcare system and probably less doctors, there will be long waits for a doctor’s visit. Unless you have a major problem the opportunity to see a doctor will become difficult due to the volume of patients as it has everywhere else in the world with this type of healthcare. With doctors making less money great healthcare will be hard to find because potential doctors will find more lucrative lines of work. I don’t know about you but I don’t think I want heart surgery from someone who makes a salary that’s been capped, I WANT THE BEST MONEY CAN BUY! The majority of Americans will get very mediocre healthcare, only the wealthy will get good healthcare.

But possibly the bigger reason, at least to me, is I don’t want government in the business. It is incredibly inefficient and too large and powerful as it is.

To quote Mike Huckabee: “Congress just voted to buy eight new Gulfstream jets with $500 million of your money so they can be squired around the world. They are spending $3 billion of your money to subsidize car purchases and then grind up the old cars. Do you trust them to give you more and better health care for less money?”

This plan will actually enslave the American people. It’s like throwing the whole country under the bus to make sure 7% of the country gets healthcare. If government is the only healthcare option it doesn’t have to compete; it doesn’t have to be successful; it doesn’t have to make a profit or be efficient, and it doesn’t even have to work very well. And, if it doesn’t work, it won’t necessarily change or go out of business — but we’ll still be paying for it with no choice of anything else. And all the while demanding that we purchase the plan whether we want it or not. Whether we need it or not.

Freedom is the free market working. When the government has the ability to mandate a doctor’s salary or demand we purchase their healthcare plan they are intruding on our freedom. Just like they overstep their bounds when they decide which corporations will fail and which ones will succeed (AIG, Chevrolet).

I come from the school of thought that if you borrow too much money, don’t have enough liquidity, make poor business decisions and offer an inferior product your company deserves to fail. But not according to Uncle Sam. They get to decide who stays in business, rewards them with stimulus money and all on our dime.

Sorry, got side-tracked.

I wish I knew a great answer, I just know this is not it. Government is not in the business of fixing problems, they are almost always THE problem.

Change.

By the way, doctor’s salary caps are already being discussed in this plan. How many people are gonna want to go to college and rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for medical school while being told they can only make $75,000/year (hypothetically).

Probably quite a few of the ones who would be making 20,000 a year without college.

My friend lives in England and National Health works well there.

One of the arguements I love is the “you might have to wait 6 weeks for surgery” arguement. In the US you can get surgery usually in a matter of days, IF you meet the qualifications–which is to say that you can pay for it. If you can’t pay for it you can wait 6 weeks, 6 months or 6 years and you still won’t get it. And don’t think your insurance company will necessarily pay for it either.

I don’t know exactly how you took no drive or ambition from my posts. If you mean I have no willingness to run others into the ground to better myself, then thank you.

@Razor X In the first place, it doesn’t take much effort to find that Britons are more satisfied with their health care system than Americans are with theirs. And in the second place, if you follow the links in that opinion article, what you’ll find is that the instances of maladministration and sub-par medical care reported on by the Telegraph occurred at hospitals run by what are called Foundation Trusts – that is, organizations essentially designed to semi-privatize health care delivery by reducing the amount of direct NHS oversight and administration and encouraging more entrepreneurial independence; they’re analogous to charter schools. By removing government oversight, accountability and administration – that is, by doing exactly what you free marketeers think ought to be done here – the quality of care was *reduced*.

And by the way, Chuck Rogers’ blathering about “market forces” notwithstanding, market forces do not drive health care provision in the US, and we do not have a “free market” (in any meaningful sense of the term) in health care here. The question is not “free market” vs. “government control,” it’s private, for-profit insurance company control vs. government control. And for all of the blubbering about “socialism” and “death panels” and so on from the so-called conservative side, the fact is that the reform passed earlier this year only nibbles at the edges of that fundamental question.

I’m going to write a song called Misunderestimate Me, but it won’t be about Bush.

Yep, my song is going to be all about misunderestimating my strategery. I betcha I’m going to make a gazillion dollars off this song!

Eulogy.

Like what?

rednecks are dumb like a “fox”. Liberals have no common sense and are thieves. They think it is o.k. to take from the wealthy to give to the poor.

Envy-based thievery, plain and simple

Aron,
Thank you for telling it the way it is….To many of these people want the gov to care of them……So much for hard work and getting ahead

FTM,

Would you have no problem with a government option that is not allowed to operate at a loss? By definition, it then wouldn’t drive private sector insurers out of business unless it was run MORE efficiently than them.

Also, in realilty, I doubt all of America would subscribe to the gov’t plan if relatively similar options are available (given the massive anti-gov’t sentiment right now). In your scenario, when the gov’t option becomes inefficient, what would stop private insurers from providing more attractive options to the consumer (therefore either driving the gov’t option to be more efficient or collapse)?

The anti-public option arguments seem predicated on the assumption that government will first be so efficient that they drive all other companies out of business, and then be so wasteful that costs will dramatically increase. Even if the gov’t option would behave this way if left unchecked, there are certainly ways to regulate it and ensure this does not happen. There’s no conspiracy… we all want our economy to work correctly.

I’ve always been a little perplexed as to why more economic conservatives don’t support the public option – if done correctly, it actually ENHANCES the free market, rather than suppressing it.

For all those who criticize the lyrics of his song, who made you the judge and jury? God forbid that an American citizen have an opinion! You all seem to have your opinions here. For you not to allow him to express his OPINION just shows that you are all judgmental hypocrits.

Laurence: No one is saying he can’t express his opinio. We are just saying he is doing so in a really bad song.

Ah, I believe we have no plumbed the highest heights of rational argumentation to which conservatives aspire.

The fact is that Medicare is so efficient that it has been the biggest bulwark against uncontrolled cost increases in US medicine for the past several decades. And it is a fact that public health systems of one sort or another, from Great Britain’s national health care service to Canada’s single payer insurance to the German, French, Swiss and many other systems are so much more efficient than our private insurer-dominated system that they all provide better medical outcomes (as measured by such indices as life expectancy and infant mortality) for the expenditure of a much smaller percentage of GDP (to those who understand such things, that is the definition of “more efficient”: better outcomes at lower costs). One might also consider the vast publicly-funded and controlled medical care system provided to current and former military personnel (i.e., the Veterans Administration) for another body of evidence demonstrating the efficiency, reliability and generally superior quality of “socialist” medicine.

Razor X and his ilk have one mantra – that the private sector *must* be more efficient than the public – and that’s exactly what it is: a mantra, a prayer whose power is believed to derive solely from repetition. It is supported neither by logic nor by the facts. And when that’s pointed out, the best they can come up with is to tell those making the point to “go do something rude” to themselves. Kinda pathetic, actually.

Jon,

You must either be a lawyer, politician, liar, or all 3 because you have a knack for distorting facts for the benefit of a good story. I’m betting just a liar, you’re too whiney to be a lawyer or politician.

Our government is running at a $13,000,000,000,000.00 deficit. Not only do you seem to not have a problem with that, you don’t seem to care if that number grows. When do we stop? When it doubles? Triples? When those who work have no money left to take away? Let’s make sure 6% of the country gets healthcare in a way that doesn’t destroy the rest of the country.

Government is efficient…Gotcha.

And when that’s pointed out, the best they can come up with is to tell those making the point to “go do something rude” to themselves. Kinda pathetic, actually.

Not the best that I could come up with. You weren’t actually making a point in your post telling me I didn’t know what I was talking about, you were just making a gratuitous insult. We could debate the topic forever, but you aren’t interested in any kind of a civil discussion; you just want to parse words with people and nitpick and exchange insults. Communicating with you on any level, on any topic at all is futile. You have poisoned the atmosphere here ever since you arrived, and I, for one am not rising to your bait anymore, so go ahead and enjoy having the last word as always because this is the last coversation you and I will ever have.

Do you think FDR pulled us out of a Depression by cutting spending. Reagan tried voo-doo economics and it didn’t work. Clinton came into office, raised spending and got us out of a recession. Kenyesian economics work.

One might also consider the vast publicly-funded and controlled medical care system provided to current and former military personnel (i.e., the Veterans Administration) for another body of evidence demonstrating the efficiency, reliability and generally superior quality of “socialist” medicine.

As we say down here Jon, “You gotta’ be shittin’ me”! I was staying out of this until you pointed to the VA as an example of EFFICIENCY. Give me a break. How many examples would you like for me to give you of the lack of efficiency of that august institution? I’ve literally got thousands. Literally meaning literally. I’ll just give you one as an example. My son was in an extended series of firefights outside Mahmudiyah in OIF2. They dug in a radiation field unbeknownst to them. Now the company is experiencing high rates of cancer. He was diagnosed with malignant tumors in his chest that were the size of small peas. SIX MONTHS later the tumors were the size of golf balls and required cutting out 4″ chunks out of his chest. It took six months to get an approval and clear the bureaucracy. No rehab due to cost cutting from the current administration. No follow ups. Nothing. Nada. Like I said, I can quite literally give you thousands of examples of what happens when a bureaucracy tries to make medical decisions. If left alone the medical staff could treat patients in a cost effective and timely manner but it is not up to them. Their hands are absolutely tied.

We won’t even discuss my 45 years dealing with the VA or this administrations attempts to bill veterans’ private insurance for treatment rendered over the past 18 months. The word Honor doesn’t even enter into the vocabulary of this administration. Not anywhere! Honor is just a word in the dictionary. Go blow smoke up some one’s shorts that doesn’t deal with the VA’s lack of efficiency on a weekly basis.

Now let’s look at your other delusional thesis in the private sector. My Lovely Bride has been in the medical records field for 30+ years. Back when the hospital was self-insured there were 5 girls in the department. 1 for compliance, 1 for transcription, and 1 for records. Now there are 26 for compliance alone. Bureaucrats constantly sticking their noses under the tent to disrupt and enforce changes made just about monthly. Joint Commissions that disrupt normal work loads constantly which inflates each job function. There are so many regulations attached to your vaunted “efficient” Medicare and Medicaid it’s past ridiculous. 99.9% of the time only 60-70% of any claim is paid. That leaves the hospital eating 30-40% of each individual claim. The government regulates insurance policies that force people to carry coverage they do not need. Why the hell do my wife and I have to carry maternity insurance on our health policy? Not only would us having a baby be far fetched it would be a downright freak of nature! Your government at work. Your “healthcare crisis” has been created by the very government you think can run a better system. Per usual they create the crisis and then want to ride up on a white horse and “fix” the very problems they created.. And you buy into that? Go figure!

Now you have the “new and impruved” Obamacare. Just in my wife’s field you will see thousands and thousands of lost jobs. The new regs require all medical records to be online and accessible by 2011. On office of 32 will now become 12 at home input personnel. That’s a net loss of 20 employees in 1 dept alone. Multiply that by the thousands of hospitals across the country and get back to me about job creation and “efficiency”. Your medical records will be out there and accessible to any and everyone that can hack a computer or have a government issued id to access. Just gives you a warm fuzzy feeling doesn’t it? Not only is this ridiculous but it won’t work. There is simply too much that has to be hands on to allow anything of this nature to be successful. But alas, it will create another “crisis” that according to you can only be solved by government.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Don’t even get me started on my youngest son’s practice and what changes he’s going through. Totally asinine. I’m not going to sit here and spout facts and numbers from the other socialist nations’ socialized medicine because there is nothing that you will believe. I’ve given you examples of things I personally know as fact and have dealt with forever. No theory. No thesis. Just old fashioned hands on experience. Frankly I don’t know why I wasted my time other than I’m bored. There’s not a damn thing anyone can say that will make you understand the sheer folly of what it is you believe. Until it is too late! I could go on and on and on for nothing. Not one thing will change your mind from your idea of your Eutopia. No matter how much I prove it to rational people you would never change your mind. And even then it’ll be Bush’s fault!

Right Stormy? :-o

You wanna’ fix healthcare? Get the guvmint OUT of it and watch how affordable it becomes again!

Kyle,

That’s not the way government works, it won’t be allowed to fail it will just keep on going while losing money and we’ll be forced to prop it up. If it would have to stay within budget and be allowed to fail I’d say give it a try, by all means. When you eliminate profit you eliminate competition.

Profit is how the free market works and works well. Profit is not a bad thing, for who goes into business to “not” make a profit? Do you?

Government run healthcare would operate at a loss just like the post office and every other government entity on down and we’ll get stuck with it.

I thought America’s theme song was Old Time Rock and Roll. They always play that at firework’s displays.

So, ah, is the government “bureaucracy” creating jobs (“26 for compliance alone”) or cutting jobs? It can’t be doing both.

Now that is simply so ignorant it is mind boggling! Government has created the high cost of health care directly through over regulation. What part of that do you not understand? 26 people for compliance? Leave it to a bedwetter to trumpet government interference as job “creation”. Wow! that’s stunning! One day you’ll wake up and realize that government jobs will not keep an economy alive. Quite the opposite. You either believe in freedom or you don’t.

Personally, I think it’s a good idea for our tax dollars to be used to pay for health care for veterans. But you believe that veterans should be paying out of their own pockets for insurance and treatment – do I have that right?

Reeding iz fundimentul! Uh, you were extolling the virtues of EFFICIENCY in the VA system. There is none until you get past the bureaucracy to the actual medical staff. Where exactly did I say veterans shouldn’t be taken care of by a general population that owes them their very existence? I gave you an example of how inefficient a government run health system truly is. From personal experience. The only point I made about vets paying is the example of the Obama administration billing veterans’ private insurance for services rendered by the VA. Where in any of that does it state that I believe vets should be paying out of pocket? We won’t even touch on Obama’s grand plan to enact a deductible on VA benefits. Lose a limb serving your Country? That’s only a $1000.00 deductible. Thank you for your service! Thank God there are still a few real Americans left in Congress that put an end to that silliness.

You know, if it just simply wasn’t so serious an issue I would wish you got exactly what you want. Within six months you’d be the first one whining about the “new” healthcare “crisis”. There is not one government run program that has succeeded and is fiscally sound. Not one! For those of us that remember the big fight over Medicare and Medicaid back in the 60s the CBO flat out stated that both programs would be broke within 50 years. 50 years later they are proven correct. Congress has been borrowing for the past 15 years to keep both systems alive due to less and less of the populace being on the tax rolls. Neither has even remotely broken even. The VA is funded yearly through each Congressional Budget and could not sustain itself in even 1/4 the capacity at which it runs. There is absolutely no way Obamacare will even do as well considering vets are only 3% of the population and we’re getting ready to support 6%. If you honestly believe that system will be self-sustaining as professed then I have a bridge I want to sell you! You can liken it to property taxes if you want. Those that don’t have children in school or have them in private school still have to pay school taxes for the “greater good”. Pretty much government in a nutshell.

From each according to their ability to each according to their need! Or “Redistribution of wealth has destroyed every republic in the history of mankind”! Government forced charity at the point of a gun has never nor will ever work. Plain and simple. The only way a government run healthcare system will work is to set it up as a stand alone entity and support it yearly with tax dollars. There is the correlation this new system has with the VA. The problem with the new Obamacare is it is incrementally destroying the best healthcare system in the world to force a government takeover of the entire system. The liberal agenda has been incrementally doing that for the past 60 years. If we continue to support a socialistic takeover then we will get just what we deserve. I know I didn’t bleed for the “state” and no one else I know did either! Funny how that works but have no fear, all us old farts that still believe in personal and fiscal responsibility are dying off at an extremely high rate. Soon you will be free to destroy the Republic with little opposition as proven by the state of “public” education in the country. Enjoy!

It is so easy to get these folks to show how out of touch they are with their fellow citizens – not to mention the course of American history – that it hardly seems fair.

Jarhead: Give me the compliance rule and I will give you the death/maiming that made it necessary.

Example: Blood banks were required to test for the HIV virus even back when the test was only 75% accurate.
Reason: 8 dead hemophiliacs.

Jarheaddad:

May God bless you.

FTM,

Gotcha. I honestly don’t know enough about the x’s and o’s of insurance companies and government run entities to discuss whether or not it would be plausible for a public option to be self-sustaining, so I suppose we’ll have to leave it at that.

Appreciate the responses though. I hadn’t ever understood the legitimate argument against the public option, I’d just heard the same oversimplified sound bites again and again.

It’s unfortunate that huge issues like that aren’t discussed more honestly and more in depth. I still maintain that Frank Luntz is the worst thing to happen to American politics in recent history.

I think that’s the problem a lot of us have with the song, rather than the message… it’s all sound bites, and not much substance.

He-he! DUDE, Mencken disliked DEMOCRACY and GOVERNMENT. He always said that if we had to have a government then one run by the rule of law was the only acceptable form. A mob is a democracy and he hated mob mentality. The mob is easliy led. Notice his take on the “first rate man”. But then reading him does require some semblence of thought recognition which you have failed to show any sign of so far. There’s always hope I guess.

Since my long ass quotes seem to annoy you here are some others by arguably the greatest mind of this country:

When we get piled
upon one another in large cities, as in Europe,
we shall become as corrupt as Europe ..

The democracy will cease to exist
when you take away from those
who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

It is incumbent on every
generation to pay its own debts as it goes.
A principle which if acted on would save
one-half the wars of the world.

I predict future happiness for
Americans if they can prevent the government
from wasting the labors of the people under the
pretense of taking care of them.

My reading of history convinces me
that most bad government results from too much
government.

No free man shall ever be debarred
the use of arms.

The strongest reason for the
people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves
against tyranny in government.

The tree of liberty must be
refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants.

To compel a man to subsidize with
his taxes the propagation of ideas which he
disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

-Thomas Jefferson

Interesting what is not taught in “public” schools any longer. Governments don’t educate – they indoctrinate.

It’s been real! ;-)

“recall that countries with publicly funded health programs – whether national health services, single payer systems or multiple insurers – deliver superior health care for less money than in the US, and in a more democratic fashion.”

Simply not true. Absolute hogwash.

You state this opinion as if it were fact. If I want opinions stated as fact I can watch Rachel Maddow, but I’d really rather not.

Jon,

I’m not saying I necessarily agree, but I can respect that argument. Whether or not you believe it’s worth risking a deficit increase to improve the healthcare system IS something that should determine your political leanings… rather than a bunch of recycled one liners with little to no relevance to the real issues.

Unfortunately, most people go with the latter.

Kyle:
The ammount of money we spend now will be more than offset by the ammount of money we save later.

The reason there are higher pregnancy and infant mortality rates here is because we have an epidemic of teen pregnancy, especially in inner cities, where healthcare is scarce.

FACEPALM.

That’s a shame but it’s not a reflection of our healthcare system.

That’s kind of exactly what it is a reflection of.

Our doctors and hospitals are the envy of the world because they are the best by far. Heaven forbid someone in your family has heart trouble or cancer but if they do you are in the right country with the best chance of survival.
Where are the stats that back this up? What organization ran them?

You don’t hear anyone say “I need open heart surgery, I better book a flight to Poland and have that surgery” or “I’ve got a brain tumor, I better get to Europe and get this checked out”. The best care in the world is in the United States, BY FAR.
No, mostly they go to Mexico or Canada.

If we were to go to the same system that the rest of the world has it probably wouldn’t change the infant mortality rate, unless our youth change their approach to “family planning” (or lack thereof) and our overall healthcare would be mediocre at best. Everyone will get below average healthcare but at least everyone will have it. Only the rich would be able to afford good healthcare. If it is so good why aren’t the people voting for it including themselves in it. BECAUSE CONGRESS KNOWS IT WILL SUCK.

Then why do people live longer and generally have better health in countries where they have socalized health care?
For the Healthy Life Expectancy we rank #24.
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthy_life_table2.html
Which is weird because we rank #2 in Total Health Care Expenditures.
http://www.photius.com/rankings/total_health_expenditure_as_pecent_of_gdp_2000_to_2005.html

Jon,

If that’s the nuttiest thing you’ve heard on here you really need to get out more.

The people who receive healthcare in this country receive the best healthcare anywhere on the planet. You and your liberal friends think that healthcare is a God given right and it doesn’t matter how much we tax, who we steal from, what it costs, whether or not it drives this country into the ground, just as long as every last person gets it. It is not a God given right any more than having a house, car, or dinner at outback steakhouse is. Sometimes life isn’t fair, in fact it’s downright hard.

You say I don’t listen to myself, did I mention you are a fool? I heard that loud and clear so I must be listening to myself. If you want to live in Europe so bad please move there. I promise, I will pay for your one way ticket there you liberal, un-American, take from the rich and give to everyone son-of-a-bitch.

Stormy,

You’re are like the retard cousin that comes to the house at family get-togethers. Everyone talks to her yet can’t wait to find a way to get to the other room. If we had universal healthcare you still would be a retard.

I’m done talking to you both. I hope you and your grandchildren enjoy the new U.S.A. It’s gonna be fantastic. Everyone will get to put all their money into a pile and share it. You can work if you want, or not, it won’t matter. We’ll all have healthcare, housing, shoot, we might even get to do the kind of work we want if the government says it’s o.k. We won’t have to worry about things like chasing a dream, succeeding, you know, all the things our great-grandparents had to worry about. Sharing is good.

You remind me of this school we used to play back in high school. They always chanted “We’re #1! We’re #1″ but they never made it higher than #6.

I don’t believe that the “change” that Darryl is referring to is about one thing in particular. Nor do I believe that it’s geared towards one particular political party. The fact of the matter is, America has been going downhill for quite sometime now, at the expense of all parties involved. If we were to truly go back to visit and look at the purpose and beliefs on which America was founded, we would find that what our founding father’s were trying to achieve for this country, is far from what America is today!! I challenge each and every one of you to do some real “American History” research. Look up each signer of the Declaration of Independence. Who they were, what they did, what they believed, and what they wanted for America. You will be surprised at your findings!! It may also be a little difficult to do…as most public schools today do not teach those facts!! Had we not “changed” from our founding father’s principles to begin with…….we would not be in a “politically correct” country now. We would be in a “Godly” country!! There is a huge difference. It is my personal belief that the lyrics in the song are a reflection of what those of us, who try to live by the same standards and principles as our founding father’s, are saying. You can keep your changes!! We don’t want them!! Our country will work much better if we stick to the original principles. It wasn’t broke. No need to change anything!! As for you Darryl…I think you should be commended for having the courage to sing what you feel. You have that right. Thanks to the good Lord up above and the Constitution. (which was created by “Godly” men) That, my dear is what country music is all about!! By the way, I am an educated average Jane/songwriter, who cares quite deeply about “MY COUNTRY” and who wants to keep “MY RIGHT” to worship “MY GOD” wherever I feel the need to do so. Mr. Malec, with all due respect, if you don’t think that someone or some thing is trying to take our freedoms away……you are not as educated as you portray yourself to be!! Open your eyes a little wider!!

I like the fact that Worley forgets that George W. Bush started the bailouts. Seems Republican are fine with government only when they are in power.
Didn’t Republican Bohener suggest we should pay for BP’s spill? Guess it doesn’t worry conservatives that Republicans want the American people to shoulder the burden and basically let BP get off scot free.

I’ve spent the past few minutes reading all of the above responses, to which I must say this: Whether you like the song or not, a songwriter writes to points that he/she feels are relevant to the listeners. Obviously, this point is, as it has more than a few of you stirred up.

Although “Keep the change” definitely stems from BHO’s campaign slogan, the song, in no way says that things were perfect in the past. It simply means that many are not happy with the route that this administration is taking us.

If my wife decided to “change” the way she cooks chicken and tries something new that I don’t like, then my saying I don’t like it has absolutely nothing to do with meals in the past. It simply means I don’t like this attempt and would prefer she find something else.

I have a different view of many things, as I spent 24 years in the service of my country. This song does not say that any one president in the past did better or worse than what we have today. It simply means that the ideals that we were founded upon worked and we should return to them. I could care less whether your parents divorced when you were young, whether your ancestor 150 years ago was a slave and whether or not you feel I owe you something. Those are nothing but excuses people use to justify their being too lazy to take responsibility for themselves and their actions. In the past, people lent a helping hand to those in need because they wanted to; Today, they do it because the government forces them to do so!

Well said, Darryl! Keep the change!

Are we supposed to base ourselves on Jefferson’s ideal of free African Americans or the reality of his always owning (and probably non-conconsentually screwing) slaves?

If, in the past, you mean before Obama. OK, you win, You are absolutely right. Things were better in the past!

“the two of you are free to sit behind your computers in the middle of the afternoon…”

Oh, the irony.

I wonder what it is about Obama that people don’t like? I mean some people were saying “Keep The Change” the day he was elected to office!

Politics & music are always a bad mix. Shuttin’ Detroit Down was nothing more than a pandering song to make money for John Rich, it had nothing to do with his patriotism at all. And now Worley is trying to do the same thing. Huge thumbs down to Dixie Chicks, John Rich, Darryl Worley and everyone else who tries to sellout to this behavior.

All I can say to all of this is Darryl Worley kicks fuc@&$!; major ass!!! God bless America!

You don’t recall a time when Government was a little smaller and a person could keep more of what they earned.

I can remember life under Reagan. We spent most of the 1980′s in a recession it took us 6 years of Bill Clinton to overcome.

And then lie about in under oath and not get impeached….

Fun fact: in the 1950s, the top tax rate in the U.S. was 90%.

funkybutmusic:
1. I’d rather my president screw an intern than the country.
2. You’d just buy me some crappy American beer anyway.

1. ‘I’d rather my president screw an intern than the country.’
Lame
2. “You’d just buy me some crappy American beer anyway.”
Shows your love of this country.

And these days, I think the Obama supporters are the ones who are “Dumb and Faithful” these days.

2. “You’d just buy me some crappy American beer anyway.”
Shows your love of this country.

No, just my hatred of bad beer.

Jon,

When my dad came back from WW2 after fighting in Guam and Iwo Jima he got a job at the Singer sewing machine factory. He made 30 cents/hr. At the end of a 40 hour week he got home with $11.88 out of $12.00 because the government withheld only 1% of his paycheck. That my friend is how big our government has become. Think about that for a second.

He got home with 99% of what he made.

Now I know that a lot of folks didn’t get a welfare check back then. I know a lot of people didn’t get free healthcare off of the backs of hard working Americans as mandated by the government. I know we probably didn’t spend millions of dollars on government built statues, government bought hammers, government bought car manufacturers, government owned insurance agencies, government owned banking industries, yada-yada-yada.

Can you agree that spending and waste is out of control? Surely a person such as yourself who apparently would argue with a street sign can at least agree with that.

There is only one direction taxes can go to pay for the waste, greed and corruption of government and that is up. It will be difficult for the next generation to be “free” when they are enslaved to paying back the debt being run up by our government. Not Obama. Our government, as you pointed out, this started a while back.

We probably didn’t have these things in the national budget:

Aging research $834,318,000 total funding
abstinence research $ 40,895,000 total funding
Abandoned mine land reclamation $158,600,000 total funding
Alaska Native Educational Programs $ 33,302,000 total funding
Alcohol open container requirements $112,000,000 total funding
Alcohol research programs $261,819,000 total funding
Assistance to torture victims $ 9,909,000 total funding
Boating safety $ 17,500,000 total funding
Boating safety financial assistance $ 60,000,000 total funding
Boll Weevil eradication program $100,000,000 total funding
Chesapeake bay program and study $ 22,000,000 total funding
Consultation agreements $ 52,211,000 total funding
Cuban and Haitian resettlement $ 9,5000,000 total funding
Debris removal insurance $999,900,000 total funding
Revitalization of public housing $567,530,000 total funding
Projects for Indian health $ 6,430,000 total funding
Drug abuse research $724,554,000 total funding
English language acquisition grants $597,374,000 total funding
Fair housing assistance $ 27,586,000 total funding
Great apes conservation $ 1,063,000 total funding
Hispanic entrepreneurial training $ 254,000 total funding
Indian child welfare act $ 10,908,000 total funding
Indian housing assistance $ 16,474,000 total funding
Infant adoption awareness program $ 19,626,000 total funding
Javits gifted-talented grant program $ 11,111,000 total funding
Lamb meat assistance program $ 32,700,000 total funding
local television loan guarantee program $1,067,000,000 total funding
Low income home energy assistance $1,888,780,000 total funding
Low income taxpayer clinics $ 7,500,000 total funding
Mortgage insurance for the purchase
or refinancing of multi-family housing $2,475,000,000 total funding
Mortgage insurance homes $143,521,171,000 total funding
Mortgage insurance hospitals $732,000,000 total funding
Sleep disorder research $49,479,000 total funding
Native american employment training $55,000,000 total funding
Pre-disaster mitigation $148,810,000 total funding
Public and Indian housing $3,578,765,000 total funding
Public assistance grants $987,614,000 total funding
Assistance in transition from
homelessness $47,600,000 total funding
Refugee and entrant assistance $238,234,000 total funding
Section 538 rental housing loans $99,410,000 total funding
Section 8 housing assistance $5,245,792,000 total funding
self-help home ownership program $26,841,000 total funding
Special education grants to states $10,068,106,000 total funding
Volunteers inservice to America $93,731,000 total funding

These were just some of the ones that made me laugh out loud. I really can’t understand where all the debt is coming from……

Fun fact: After cutting taxes in 1981, Ronald Reagan raised them again in 1982, 1983 and 1984, a total of $100 billion in tax hikes.

Thanks for backing me up, Razor X. I anxiously await your denunciation of the thieving, socialistic Ronald Reagan.

Fun facts: Reagan approved the expansion of Social Security and the addition of 61,000 workers to the federal payroll. What a crafty, devious socialist he was!

Stormy,

As usual, very good points. I think you are tethered to a table leg but unfortunately you can still reach the computer keys.

It sounds like you should thank God you weren’t around back then. You would have never survived because most people were proud to take care of themselves and wouldn’t have it any other way, the trade off of government intrusion was not worth a handout.

I’ve worked very hard and have money set aside for medical emergencies and other problems that might arise. You wouldn’t understand, I have ambition, I’ve made good money, lived on less than I’ve made, invested wisely and I don’t sit around on my fat ass like you waiting for the money fairy or Obama to save me. I think I know why your aunt’s husband was a drunkass and couln’t work, it runs in the family.

Also, I understand there was an epidemic of pregnant mother’s uterus’s sliding out, almost daily in some states, another valid point.

The truth is you’ll be fine as long as there are people like me that you can take from to eat. It’s funny, it’s usually people like you who complain about not being able to make it who are 80 lbs. overweight and have a satellite dish on the side of their house…..

Boy a song that dares to dissent aganist the Obama administration brings out the America hate.

It sounds like you should thank God you weren’t around back then. You would have never survived because most people were proud to take care of themselves and wouldn’t have it any other way…

Actually, we have programs like Social Security, unemployment insurance and so on precisely because most people back then wanted to have it another way.

Kevin W., I’d say the folks who trash 100+ years of American history are the stronger candidates for being labeled “haters.”

Razor X: spin it however you like, the fact is that the top personal income tax rate fought for by Reagan and his Republican congress was some 30 per cent higher than the top personal income tax rate fought for by Obama and his democratic congress. So when you sign on to a “keep the change” slogan, you are calling for higher tax rates on the rich, which is pretty much your side’s definition of socialism these days. Maybe you ought to start calling yourself Hammer And Sickle X!

Funkybutmusic,

Why are you insulting everyone who disagrees with you or points out flaws in your logic? Good for you to be saving. as a “leftie” (who votes on issues, not parties), I agree with some of what you say (save $$, live below your income, etc.) but unfortunately too many people (many who would align themselves as republican) don’t. They spend, spend and spend, just like our government who spends, spends, and spends. Both Dems and Repubs do it. The whole governmental system is broken but to say that all “socialist” ideas are ‘bad’ is to discount how many actually work.

Stormy,

Hogwash.

If you can’t live on less than you make you either need to lower your standard of living or raise your income. It’s simple math, think about it.

Just because one is breathing doesn’t mean they deserve to be a homeowner or have a car payment for a nice car.

It is possible for everyone to live on less than they make, it’s done everyday by people who have no more intelligence than you but it takes sacrifice. The answer is not government assistance.

And before you start preaching about walking a mile in your shoes, I have. I just didn’t to continue down the same path and expect a different result.

Stormy,

Hogwash.

If you can’t live on less than you make you either need to lower your standard of living or raise your income. It’s simple math, think about it.

So they should live in a box and eat saltines? Then you will just blame them for being homeless. Jack London wrote something that should be required reading:
And one and all, they join in teaching a fundamental lie. They do not know it is a lie, but their ignorance does not make it more of a truth. And the lie they preach is `thrift.’ An instance will demonstrate it. In overcrowded London, the struggle for a chance to work is keen, and because of this struggle wages sink to the lowest means of subsistence. To be thrifty means for a worker to spend less than his income–in other words, to live on less. This is equivalent to a lowering of the standard of living. In the competition for a chance to work, the man with a lower standard of living will underbid the man with a higher standard. And a small group of such thrifty workers in any overcrowded industry will permanently lower the wages of that industry. And the thrifty ones will no longer be thrifty, for their income will have been reduced till it balances their expenditure.

In short, thrift negates thrift. If every worker in England should heed the preachers of thrift and cut expenditure in half, the condition of there being more men to work than there is work to do would swiftly cut wages in half. And then none of the workers of England would be thrifty, for they would be living up to their diminished incomes. The short-sighted thrift-preachers would naturally be astounded at the outcome. The measure of their failure would be precisely the measure of the success of their propaganda. And, anyway, it is sheer bosh and nonsense to preach thrift to the 1,800,000 London workers who are divided into families which have a total income of less than $5.25 per week, one-quarter to one-half of which must be paid for rent.

http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/PeopleOfTheAbyss/chapter26.html

Doesn’t recognize Jack London’s name *and* misses his whole point – nice!

Also missed: the point about Social Security and other such programs being established “back then.” Poor funkybutmusic gets so wrapped up in his anti-government ranting that he first tells us that unlike now, people “back then” didn’t need and didn’t want government support – and then, when it’s pointed out that that’s exactly what they wanted, says well, they don’t need and want it now, when anyone with half a brain can tell you that the vast majority of Americans continue to support the concept of Social Security, Medicare and all the rest. But no matter which part of that confused, self-contradictory chain of argument you look at, the fact is that it’s funkybutmusic who’s out of touch with his or her fellow Americans’ beliefs to the point that it’s he or she who ought to be looking for some other country in which to live. Americans are discontented with their government because of the difficulties it’s had in delivering what it’s supposed to, not because they think it shouldn’t be delivering those things at all.

And you betcha that I think access to health care should be a right, as do many (and a growing number) of my fellow citizens. Why not? There’s nothing final about the rights guaranteed in the original Constitution (oh, wait; there weren’t any!) Nothing final about the rights guaranteed in the first 10 amendments, either, which didn’t include the right to freedom from slavery, nor the right to vote for women. This country is in the business of expanding and extending rights, and it can certainly afford to offer such a guarantee, which would do much to raise our standard of living across the board in the same way that the guarantee of some financial support to citizens of a certain age did more than anything else to lift the elderly out of poverty several generations ago.

If you want to talk about irony, here’s some: folks like funkybutmusic profess to see the United States as the apex of civilized society, yet their professed ideal version of our country would be a reversion to the jungle, with everyone for him- or herself and devil take the hindmost. Thanks to the struggles of generations that came before us – exactly those people “back then” that funkybutmusic and his or her ilk profess to admire – we’ve gotten away from that, and one thing’s for sure: we’re not going back. We’ll keep that change, thanks much.

You do realize that you can work, making more than minimum wage, and still not make enough to keep you from being homeless, right funky?

Funky: You know there are a wide number of people out there who don’t even use money as a measure of sucess.

As for the governments’s role. I don’t agree with you on that. For starters, I don’t believe in the concept of “illegal aliens,” and that whole mess is pretty much a load of racist nonsense that the people in power have cooked up to keep the working classes fighting among themselves. I believe that the government’s role is to work for the people of the United States to make their life better.

As for deamonizing sucess, lets look at Wal-mart. Sucessful? It makes a lot of money. And who gets all of that money? A handful of people at the top. Who earns the stores most of that money? The clerks and stockboys and staff of the stores–who are making minimum wage and often get screwed out of their pay and benefits. Why is it right for the majority of the money made at the stores to go to the people who don’t do the work to earn it?

Stormy,

I apologize. I just went back and read your previous post several times over and studied on it a little longer.

Yep, you’re correct, it can’t be done. You can’t cut your lifestyle making more than minimum wage without going homeless. Can’t be done.

That’s sarcasm by the way, in case you missed it.

Life can be hard but when you’re free life is also what you make it. When you give your freedom to the government in return for what they will give you then life is what THEY make it and I don’t want that and I don’t want to fund that. In fact I will fight that.

I know there are people struggling and it sucks. I just know that government entitlements are not the solution. Most who receive government entitlements are still struggling even while being assisted, but now they’ve lost their incentive to better themselves. They are enslaved.

There are instances in which people truly can’t make on their own but if you honestly think that is the case in the vast majority of people getting entitlements through housing, welfare and money than you are naive.

I disagree with you down to my core. In fact I despise what you stand for.

Funky:
1. You drive to work and back on government “entitlements.” All of us enjoy things we get from the government that are paid for by tax dollars, every single day.

2. You are Area Man.

if you think living on less than you make (which is good advice btw, everyone should try it, that IS the “truth”) suddenly causes people to lower their working wage triggering mass lower wages…

*Still* doesn’t get it.

As for the rest, it’s really a very tiresome rant. The major entitlement programs are Social Security and Medicare, which are enormously popular and have been every since the people “back then” – those allegedly crusty old indpendentistas – fought for them. Nothing shows someone to be more out of touch than a rant about “welfare,” which was basically done away with years ago (and by a Democratic White House and Congress, for those who care about such things). And don’t forget: the more he or she opposes programs like Social Security and Medicare, the more out of touch he or she is with American public opinion. It’s the anti-government nuts who are stronger candidates for one-way tickets to some other country than folks who support the idea that American citizens have a right to some income security in their old age, some unemployment insurance when they are laid off, and some health care when they need it. Those ideas are as American as apple pie.

Stormy,

For the last time, I’ve been there. It can be done. You are a victim.

Jon,

You are so misguided. Welfare was basically done away with years ago? Once again, this is a PARTIAL list of government funded programs. Keep in mind this is a partial list of over 1600 programs, these are just some of the ones that should make you open your eyes:

Projects for Indian health $ 6,430,000 total funding
English language acquisition grants $597,374,000 total funding
Fair housing assistance $ 27,586,000 total funding
Hispanic entrepreneurial training $ 254,000 total funding
Indian child welfare act $ 10,908,000 total funding
Indian housing assistance $ 16,474,000 total funding
Low income home energy assistance $1,888,780,000 total funding
Low income taxpayer clinics $ 7,500,000 total funding
Mortgage insurance for the purchase
or refinancing of multi-family housing $2,475,000,000 total funding
Native american employment training $55,000,000 total funding
Public and Indian housing $3,578,765,000 total funding
Public assistance grants $987,614,000 total funding
Assistance in transition from
homelessness $47,600,000 total funding
Refugee and entrant assistance $238,234,000 total funding
Section 538 rental housing loans $99,410,000 total funding
Section 8 housing assistance $5,245,792,000 total funding
self-help home ownership program $26,841,000 total funding
Revitalization of public housing $567,530,000 total funding

THESE ARE SOME OF THE ONES THAT MADE ME WANT TO VOMIT:

abstinence research $ 40,895,000 total funding
Abandoned mine land reclamation $158,600,000 total funding
Alaska Native Educational Programs $ 33,302,000 total funding
Boll Weevil eradication program $100,000,000 total funding
English language acquisition grants $597,374,000 total funding
Great apes conservation $ 1,063,000 total funding
Hispanic entrepreneurial training $ 254,000 total funding
Lamb meat assistance program $ 32,700,000 total funding
Sleep disorder research $49,479,000 total funding

These are just a handful of examples of government waste. And you expect them to run a healthcare system? I’m very sorry but I do GET IT.

May God bless this great nation. I still pray for you both……

funkybutmusic
July 4, 2010 at 3:19 am Permalink Stormy,

For the last time, I’ve been there. It can be done. You are a victim.

I’m fine. Unlike you I don’t just worry about me. However, a lot of the people I work with already live below a basic subsistance level. How much farther do they have to drop?

I think farms will make it just fine without spending over 5 BILLION dollars on Section 8 housing assistance.

You’re wrong.

I am not a farmer, and again I am fine. That does not, however, mean that everyone is. Family farmers in this country struggle every day because they are held to a higher standard than their commerical bretheren. Why shouldn’t they get section 8 housing if they qualify?

Why should ANYONE get section 8 housing simply because they qualify, that should be the question! It doesn’t take that much to qualify for it.

For every man who receives something for no work, there is another man who works and receives nothing.

I think I know where you fit in that equation and I’m praying that we can vote out the people who think like you this November.

funkybutmusic
July 4, 2010 at 4:59 pm Permalink Why should ANYONE get section 8 housing simply because they qualify, that should be the question! It doesn’t take that much to qualify for it.
Because decent minded people don’t like seeing ohers homeless.

For every man who receives something for no work, there is another man who works and receives nothing.
Now farming is “no work.” Have you ever seen even an eipsode of Little House on the Prarie?
I thought, by your account, if you worked you had to make enough that not only could you buy anything you wanted, you could cut back and still be fine. Now people work and get nothing?

I think I know where you fit in that equation and I’m praying that we can vote out the people who think like you this November.
I work my ass off, happily pay my taxes and give still more to charity and always give a dollar to the homeless people I pass on the street. Where does that fit on your little scale?

You pay off your tax bill for the year on March 28th.

Funkybutmusic, when you say you’re praying for Stormy and Jon, are you really praying for them or is it more like a Jaron And The Long Road To Love pray?LOL!

MIchelle,

That is a funny song though….

Amen sister, preach on. I will discuss the Bible with you all day long and get much enjoyment.

I will lay all my worldly possessions at the feet of Jesus as they were supplied to me by him, but I will fight the likes of you to my grave for demanding that I lay them at the feet of Obama.

I feel I have been a good steward of what God has given me, financially and otherwise.

You are a victim.

May God bless this great nation…

Stormy,

You are very wrong and misinterpreting what is said. Jesus has entrusted me with his money to do his will. His will is not government waste and fraud, that is not how He would have me use the money He has entrusted me with.

What you read in that one section is not a commandment for us, it is an example of people exhibiting great trust in a few of God’s chosen men back in that day.

No where in the Bible are we as Christians commanded to sell everything we own and put it in a big pile for others to wade in. God expects me to give at least one tenth of my fruits to Him and to be mindful and charitable to those in need. Your interpretation and my interpretation and Obama’s interpretation of those in need are very, very different.

The Bible instructs me to save and invest my money wisely. No where in the Bible does it say Christians are to not have wealth. Wealth can be a very Godly thing, think of the others you can help when you are fiscally wise and have a tool to provide for others. This world would be much worse off if the only ones with wealth were the unGodly.

It is not wise to send all my money to the government for the purpose of helping others only to have them spend $100,000,000 on the research of boll weevil eradication.

Stormy, a word of advice, the Bible is a complex writing of intertwined teachings and must be treated as such. You would be wise to not try to use a few verses out of context as a weapon against others.

God bless this great nation of ours….

Stormy,

Read on, in it’s entirety, and you’ll come to grips. In the meantime I guess the government with continue to supply your meal ticket as you ignorantly lecture me on the “sin” of working hard and saving something.

With whom much is given much is expected and I live by that. Money is not the root of all evil. The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.

I don’t love my money but I will not have you or the government instruct me on the best usage for it. You have proven to be incapable of rendering those decisions by your own admission, you don’t have much.

The Bible does not command me to hoard my money but at the same token it does not command me to give it all away. You worry about your money, or lack thereof, and I’ll worry about the most Godly way to handle mine.

God bless this great nation….

Chris,

Proverbs 10:22 says, “The blessing of the Lord brings wealth, without painful toil for it.”

Yet at the same time the Bible tells us that the blessing of wealth is not a reward God gives to those who are lazy. Again in Proverbs we read, “He who works his land will have abundant food, but he who chases fantasies lacks judgment” (12:11).

Other passages in Proverbs about work:

“All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty” (14:23).
“Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth. He who gathers crops in the summer is a wise son, but he who sleeps during harvest is a disgraceful son” (10:4,5).
“One who is slack in his work is a close relative of one who destroys” (18:9).

1 Timothy 5:8 says that anyone who does not take care of his own family “has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

In Proverbs we’re also told that, “A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children” (13:22). In order to leave an inheritance, not just to our own children, but to our children’s children requires work, discipline, investing, planning and saving up our money!

The Bible tells us that it is through noble qualities that wealth is obtained (hard work, diligence, sacrifice) and that failure to do those things will result in poverty. That’s not to say that all those who are poor or in poverty refuse to work, but it does tell us that those kinds of characteristics and flaws will most often lead to poverty.

In Luke 19 we read where Jesus tells a parable about three servants who were given charge over some money. In the story, Jesus says that two of the servants wisely invested the money while the third buried it in the ground. In His story, the one who simply buried it in the ground was called “lazy and wicked.”

What Can We Do With Money?

According to the Bible there are things we can do with money that are fine, good and proper. Here is a list:

1. Further God’s Kingdom – This is to be taken care of above all else. We are commanded to take 10 percent off the top of our earnings to give to further God’s Kingdom. We should also give to the church to send missionaries, train teachers and oversee the work of the church (Malachi 3:7-12, 1 Corinthians 9:13-14, 2 Corinthians 9:7).

2. Provide for our own families. The Bible says that we are expected to provide for our own families. Once we’ve done that, we can worry about helping others and, in fact, we should work toward being in a financial state where we can help other families but each person should make sure that he/she provides for his/her immediate family first and work outward from there (1 Timothy 5:8, Proverbs 13:22).

3. Help the poor. But it doesn’t just have to be with money. As the old saying goes, “Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” But when someone is in a bad time, those who have taken care of the first two priorities will be prepared and able to provide financial assistance to help someone get back on his feet. The challenge is to determine which would be best: money, training or, if the person is lazy, to allow that person to experience hunger so that they’ll appreciate the value of work. Sometimes that is also being “kind” as Proverbs 19:17 says to be to the poor (Proverbs 19:17, 21:13, 29:7). Either way, the Bible tells us to help the poor.

4. Invest for our future. It is wrong to mooch off of others especially if we’re able-bodied enough to do something to earn an income. And as we are earning we should be planning for a day that will probably come when we aren’t able to work as hard or as long. The Bible speaks well of those who leave an inheritence to their children, but not those who live off of their children. We should plan and save for the future (Proverbs 13:22, 21:20, 27:18, 31:25, Ecclesiastes 11:2, Luke 19:12-26).

5. Enjoy the fruits of our labor. The Bible doesn’t condemn enjoying the results of your work. In fact, we read about feasting and celebrations in the Bible after a time of work and production. The first miracle of Jesus was to turn water to wine at a feast of a wealthy man. The Bible says there is a time to “laugh” to “dance” and to have “peace” (Ecclesiastes 3:1-8; also see Proverbs 13:25, 14:24, 15:6, 31:31).

May God bless our great nation…..

I will say this: funkybutmusic is one hell of a cut-and-paster.

Jon,

“It is not wise to send all my money to the government for the purpose of helping others only to have them spend $100,000,000 on the research of boll weevil eradication.”

I’m glad when you quoted me you went to the trouble to type it manually and that you didn’t cut and paste it. I’m sure it took a little longer but it means so much more when you physically type it out.

Moron.

Maybe if you and Stormy could gather up and cook all of the boll weevils you could save the country $100,000,000 and feed the homeless in one fell swoop. Hey, Stormy might even make some extra income, no, on second thought, why take a second job when that government check is on the way.

Stormy,

Once again, you’ve got it going on. We’re all burning in Hell if we don’t sell our earthly possessions and give the proceeds to the government to help the needy.

I’m gonna go against your wishes though and continue to work, save, invest and donate to charity. If I can keep the government’s hands off of enough of it I’ll pass some down to my children’s children, of course after you get your share.

I still pray for you both and this great nation…..

Maybe if you and Stormy could gather up and cook all of the boll weevils you could save the country $100,000,000 and feed the homeless in one fell swoop.
Do you know what a boll weevil is?

Hey, Stormy might even make some extra income, no, on second thought, why take a second job when that government check is on the way.
I am doing fine on my income. However, most of the women I work with can’t take second job because they would earn 8.00 an hour and pay 10.00 an hour in childcare. What’s the point of working a second job if you end up owing 16.00 per day?

Once again, you’ve got it going on. We’re all burning in Hell if we don’t sell our earthly possessions and give the proceeds to the government to help the needy
I didn’t write that–Matthew did.

Here’s a little background info on the boll weevil eradication program…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boll_Weevil_Eradication_Program

GOD BLESS THE USA

What a horribly presumptuous analyzation of a great song. Quit jumping to conclusions if you really want to be taken seriously. Worley never claims to have loved Bush policy, and he didn’t blame Obama for the bailouts. He simply does not like the change.
And why does he not have the right to express his political opinions but it is alright for green day and Barbara Streisand to open their big mouths?
This is a song, not a political campaign. It is not at all Worley’s job to create solutions to problems, especially when they do not fit into a song created for entertainment.
God Bless America!!

The thing that no one here seems to understand is that even though this song (and the others mentioned) takes a shot at Obama’s “Change”, the issue is not just with Socialists(Democrats). All of us that agree with Worley are fed up with the “Change” that both parties have handed us. Neither party at this point understands what our Founding Fathers set us on a course to accomplish. America needs another Revolution, from itself. This is not Democrat vs. Republican. This is Socialism (Dems and Rebus) vs. America (our Founding Fathers).

This conversation is totally pointless, it’s a good song with good lyrics and it’s fun to listen to, it’s not a political discussion or a break through in melodic composition, it’s a country song that is about what many of us are feeling right now, and none of us know how to get back what we had or want but the frustration still exists and this song says it. If you have a problem with this song you are not the target audience and probably listening to the wrong radio station.

I think that this song should be song of the year. Its just too bad that there are too many non meaning songs out there that are not, in my opinion country music, that will be played on radio too much. Also I think that there are too many ignorant people in the world today to make a badly needed “change”. My father always said,” you can’t fix stupid”.

Love this song! Mr. Worly is dead on with this song. The guy promised change, BUT his “change” was not what he promised. “Under my plan, unemployment will not rise above 6%”. Really? What about the 9+% we have right now? And if this guy hadn’t ordered a “change” to the formula used for unemployment, the real % would be around 20%-30%!