Ronald Reagan's Brilliant Speech Warning about Socialized Healthcare

Here is a link to a brilliant, insightful, and in my opinion absolute truth about the perils of socialized medicine like the healthcare "reform" bill in play today and/or the public option beloved by the liberals.

This puppy already has nearly a million views. Maybe the rest of the people will finally start to catch on.

Here is a little write-up about it.

On the eve of the Obama administration's most aggressive push yet to pass a national health care plan, a 50-year-old audio recording of Ronald Reagan speaking out against "socialized medicine" has become a huge YouTube sensation.

Nearly 1 million viewers have watched the video, in which the late president, speaking before he became California governor, warns that government intervention in the health care system creates a slippery slope.

"One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project," he said in the recording. But he said most people in America oppose "socialized medicine" when given the choice.

"From here, it's a short step to all the rest of socialism," Reagan said.

Source

Thisa is a man that thought Voodoo economics would be the end-all be-all for this country.

Nit much faith in what he had to say.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


You should really spend the 10 minutes and listen to it. It is very straight forward and its chalk full of common sense.

Reagan is the man that saved the country from demise that was created by the failed policies and weak stature of the Carter Administration. Remember those wonderful carter days when housing interest rates were like 15% and Iran captured our people while we stood around like a bunch of nutless wonders? Wow this is starting to remind me of some nutless wonder we have running the country now.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

This is the man that saved the country from demise that was created by the failed policies and weak stature of the Carter Administration. Remember those wonderful carter days when housing interest rates were like 15% and Iran captured our people while we stood around like a bunch of nutless wonders? Wow this is starting to remind me of some nutless wonder we have running the country now.

I'm not going to get into a Reagan vs. Carter debate. It's been had far too many times.

All I can say is, how do you know what effect Carter's administration had, when nearly every thing they did was repealed immediately when Ronny got into office?

And dont come at me with Iran-contra or any of that garbage. It has no place in this argument, and quite frankly, in no way does it help make Reagan look good.

I see you are just attempting to troll on Obama/liberals here, though, so I'll disengage.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Well I guess we could know the value of the Carter policies by looking at their outcomes. Lets see a country weakened financially, militarily, and diplomatically all in just 4 years.

Thank God they all got repealed or we would all be speaking Russian right now.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Well I guess we could know the value of the Carter policies by looking at their outcomes. Lets see a country weakened financially, militarily, and diplomatically all in just 4 years.

Thank God they all got repealed or we would all be speaking Russian right now.

Ahh yes, the old short-sighted nature of americans. Its the same reason people think clinton was a good president.

presidential effect on the nation is not apparent until decades later.

Nice try though.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Well I am open-minded so maybe you could enlighten me and tell me what you think would have happened if Carter's policies stood for 20 or 30 years.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Well I am open-minded so maybe you could enlighten me and tell me what you think would have happened if Carter's policies stood for 20 or 30 years.

I dont claim to know. Nor can you.

the one thing that IS certain, is the fact that this country would not be in a war to control oil supplies, considering that he was(way before it was cool, by the way) one of the absolute leaders as far as lowering oil consumption. In fact, one of the very first things that reagan repealed was Carters legislation that said america would NEVER consume more oil than it did at that time.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Well let's look at just that. How would our economy have grown for the last 30 years if we couldn't increase oil use past 1979. We would have no more deisel for trucks, deisel for trains, deisel for ships, gas for cars, petro for plastics, etcc... You cannot just freeze the use of something when you do not have something to replace it with. To this day no one has invented/discovered a fuel or way of powering transportation that can come close to oil and as cheap as oil and as plentiful as oil.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Well let's look at just that. How would our economy have grown for the last 30 years if we couldn't increase oil use past 1979. We would have no more deisel for trucks, deisel for trains, deisel for ships, gas for cars, petro for plastics, etcc... You cannot just freeze the use of something when you do not have something to replace it with. To this day no one has invented/discovered a fuel or way of powering transportation that can come close to oil and as cheap as oil and as plentiful as oil.

And instead there would be a total new industry of alternative energy, alternative transport, materials, etc.
You are blatantly obvious in your intent here.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by captaintyinknots]

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Nobody has developed alternative energy that can compete in the last 30 years. Hopefully, someday they will, but they havent. If alternative energy was competitive we would already be using it. We don't live in a dream world where just because we want something it falls from the sky.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Nobody has developed alternative energy that can compete in the last 30 years. Hopefully, someday they will, but they havent. If alternative energy was competitive we would already be using it. We don't live in a dream world where just because we want something it falls from the sky.

Ugh, please stop trying to pull this off topic.

Alternative energy has not been a necessity because of fossil fuels. Its that simple. More emphasis = more development.

We also dont live in a dream world where the easy answer is always right, not to mention we DO live in a world where the money makers make the policies. Not surprising then, that most politicians have stakes in the oil business, is it?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


So you are trying to say there is some company out there that has developed competitive alternate energy that is passing up on the billions they could make because our politicians own some oil stocks?

There are 100's of alternative energy projects going on right now. Most of them are not financed with government money. They are financed with big private money like Kleiner Perkins for example. Even the government has spent billions on cold fusion without any real success. It isn't like people are trying, we just aren't their yet. I hope one day we get there. The Bloom Box looks like a small step in the right direction.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Nobody in their right mind says we are going to freeze the amount of something our economy depends on without being darn sure there is a viable alternative on the very near horizion. That is like playing Russian Roulette with your economy.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

So you are trying to say there is some company out there that has developed competitive alternate energy that is passing up on the billions they could make because our politicians own some oil stocks?

There are 100's of alternative energy projects going on right now. Most of them are not financed with government money. They are financed with big private money like Kleiner Perkins for example. Even the government has spent billions on cold fusion without any real success. It isn't like people are trying, we just aren't their yet. I hope one day we get there. The Bloom Box looks like a small step in the right direction.

This will be my last response. I make it a point not to argue with trolls. Especially the ones who twist words, twist context, and try to pull people off topic.

Do not put words in my mouth. What is said is, if there were more emphasis on alternative energy over the last 30 years, there would be more production. Thats it. Thats all.

We arent talking about politicians owning stocks. We are talking major stakes in oil firms.

In your last paragraph, you have proven my point. Most alterna-energy research right now is being done privately. Do you not think, with gov't funding and backing, there would not be more production in this field?

Enough of this. Sad that you are taking your own thread off topic. But again, your agenda is obvious, so it shouldnt surprise me.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Nobody in their right mind says we are going to freeze the amount of something our economy depends on without being darn sure there is a viable alternative on the very near horizion. That is like playing Russian Roulette with your economy.

Okay, one more:
Nobody in their right mind thinks voodoo economics is a viable economic philosophy, yet you are here praising the man who pushed it

I do love though, how when challenged, you have immediately turned this into a carter vs. reagan debate, instead of addressing the actual topic of y our own post.

Classic tactic here.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by captaintyinknots]

reply to post by captaintyinknots

Do not put words in my mouth. What is said is, if there were more emphasis on alternative energy over the last 30 years, there would be more production. Thats it. Thats all.

Could you or Carter guarantee that without a doubt? Because if you failed then you would have collapsed the entire economy. Just because you focus on something and spend a lot of money doesn't guarantee you will get the results you are seeking.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Is voodoo economics and official term? What do you think Reagan did, took a tiki doll and stuck pins in it to turn the economy around? I wish it was that easy.

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Do not put words in my mouth. What is said is, if there were more emphasis on alternative energy over the last 30 years, there would be more production. Thats it. Thats all.

Could you or Carter guarantee that without a doubt? Because if you failed then you would have collapsed the entire economy. Just because you focus on something and spend a lot of money doesn't guarantee you will get the results you are seeking.

Again, this is not about Carter. If you wanted to make a thread about him, you should have made a thread about him.

Using one topic to push your agenda on a completely different one is really kind of sad.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Is that your standard reply when you cannot support your side of the argument? Look you should really lsten to the speech Reagan gave regardless of how you feel for him. He makes a very good case for the dangers of letting government get directly involved in our healthcare.