Free Markets, Free People


Arnold Schwarzenegger: Dope Of the Week

Where to start with this joker:

California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger suggested that his party is out of touch with average Americans on the issue of health care.

“You’ve got to listen to the people. If the nation is screaming out loud, ‘We need health care reform. We want to have universal health care. We want to have everyone insured. We want to bring the costs down. We want everyone to have access.’ I mean, that’s what they want; that’s what you do,” Schwarzenegger said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Arguing that California Republicans were out of touch with the majority of Californians who wanted to raise taxes to fix the state’s budget crisis, Schwarzenegger said it is “the same nationwide.”

He said Republicans need to embrace what the people want, even if it means accepting tax increases that go against their party principles:

“Even though it maybe is against your principles or philosophy, you still have to go, because that’s what the people want you to do,” he said.

A) Healthcare: the nation isn’t screaming any of that out loud. A definite minority want it. But just as large a minority don’t want any part of it. A third minority isn’t sure one way or the other.

B) If the purpose of government is to simply give the people everything they want, then there’s no reason for a budget, a legislature or a governor. Just put everything to a direct vote via referendum, write a program that can figure the cost of each “yes” referendum, figure the tax necessary to fund the approved program and assess the tax. If you must have a legislature or governor, they would only write the law and rubber stamp it based on the referendum (per the Schwarzenegger “philosophy” only unanimous approvals allowed) and the “governor” is there to do nothing more than to sign it into law – period. Once taxes reach 100% nothing else can be signed into law and the legislature is in permanent recess and the governor is no longer needed (hey I can be just as absurd as Schwarzenegger).  

Oh, wait, I forgot – you have to have a governor and a legislature to pile up trillions of dollars of debt “giving the people what they want” and drive the state into bankruptcy – my bad. 

C) Why have principles if you’re not supposed to live by them/act on them. Why run on them, tell voters they’ll be your guide and get elected because of them? Schwarzenegger has gone from a somewhat entertaining RINO to an outright idiot.

“Even though it may be against your principles or philosophy” do it anyway because that’s what the people want? This guy would obviously rather be liked than principled (if he ever was really principled). Principles are a hindrance to his pursuit of approval (see what steroids will do to your brain?). And my guess is, he’d label this nonsense as “leadership”.

Lord help California. Schwarzenegger makes Gray Davis look great.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

20 Responses to Arnold Schwarzenegger: Dope Of the Week

  • McQ: Dope Of the Internet

  • Principles are really just abstract guesses.  Pragmatism means focusing on what works to help real people.  Face it, Schwarzenegger is reflecting the majority opinion in the US, as the GOP continues to move towards permanent minority status.

  • What could be more evident, simple, or clear for any publicly elected official to state, or believe (?): GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT! Don’t ignore, twist, or obfuscate what is plainly evident to any person with any sense of fairness, civility, and yes, intelligence. This country needs affordable NATIONAL healthcare, or the increasing out-of-control costs will bankrupt this country, with far more certainty than any other NECESSARY expense in our nation’s future.

    War, and an exponentially expanding military debt is NOT NECESSARY to the future safety of this country. We have enough nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them anywhere on this planet, at a moment’s notice, so that we could effectively cut our defense spending by at least 67%, as long as we don’t go looking for trouble ourselves. One to three of our largest bombs, delivered within days of 9/11 would have sent a clear and final message to any and all peoples of this planet: We WILL NOT be baselessly attacked, and sit by passively. This response would have succintly precluded the need for any war or invasion, and told the world at large, how we would respond in the future, to unprovoked aggression.

    THIS APPROACH is how we CAN economically justify and provide healthcare for all US citizens!

    • So your ideal domestic policy is “gimme gimme gimme,” and your ideal foreign policy is dropping nukes as a first response to terrorism?

      • We could take every single penny that we spend on national defense ($500 billion FY 2007) and it would pay for about 25% of the annual cost of healthcare ($2 trillion 2006).  Despite liberal fantasy, health care expeditures would only go up if everyone were given “free” healthcare in a non-market based system devoid of the law of demand.  That being the case, our federal government will do what every other government does that provides socialized healthcare; it will ration it for everyone.  We will get long waiting times for doctor’s appointments and medical procedures and drug innovation will grind to an almost complete halt.  Liberal politicians will brag about universal coverage but the actual healthcare will suck.  Britain’s NHS is a joke.  Canada’s system is just as bad.  They are both free riders on the medical innovation that is funded by the American people.

        Everyone knows all of that except the ignoramuses that constitute the Democrat party base.  Schwarzenegger is correct in saying that people want it, but that isn’t dispositive of the issue.  “Universal coverage” leads to universally crappy healthcare despite the wishes of hoi polloi who voted for the messiah.  We need real leadership to tell people the truth.  Money doesn’t grow on trees, the government can’t miraculously make health care plentiful, free and effective.  If the government could help by enacting real reform like de-coupling it from employment, de-regulating health insurance and reduce the $1 Billion average cost of bringing a drug to market.  

        Erb says: “Pragmatism means focusing on what works to help real people.”  That’s exactly why we shouldn’t socialize medicine.  If you want to be practical, then you should acknowledge that socialized healthcare sucks everywhere it exists.  Don’t tell me about life expectancy and child mortality.  There are many factors that have a greater impact on life expectancy than the percentage of people with health insurance.  If the rest of the world defined a ‘live birth’ the same way it’s defined in the US, we would be near the bottom of the list for infant mortality. 

        We need leadership to do the right thing and tell people the truth. 

  • “Even though it may be against your principles or philosophy” do it anyway because that’s what the people want?

    Oddly enough, this came up in a gaming group I’m in online. I’m told to give it up, as clearly my reliance on a few set principles is a horrible thing. Writing those people off completely has yet to bother me.

    Doesn’t change the taste of dinner a bit.

  • In all of this health care debate, I never seem to hear anyone ask, “Why does it cost so much?”  Instead of DMV-izing health care, how about we address the issues that prevent people from affording it?  Good God.  The government is not the answer to our problems. 

    I would love to see an application of conservative/libertarian principles to the issue of rising health care costs.  It would probably involve massive tort reform and deregulation.  We make doctors sitting targets for frivolous lawsuits, and wonder why they charge so much.

    For you lefties so eager to put Uncle Sam in charge of your PPO, a question.  Assume for a moment we nationalize healthcare in some fashion, and eight years from now a huge political shift puts someone like Huckabee in office.  What is to stop the Executive from clamping down on abortion?  Heck, maybe pro-lifers should jump on the bandwagon.  This may be their big chance!  I’ve heard you people whine incessently about how Bush took away our civil rights.  And you’re so eager to give them away just because a Democrat is in the Oval Office?

    See, this is why you need to have principles.

  • I haven’t been screaming out loud for nationalized health care. Who is Ahnold hearing? I think he’s  contracted the Kennedy virus from so many years of close proximity. On the other hand, I have been screaming about prison unions, other public sector unions, mandates, public sector pensions, …

  • Every Day Erb amazes…aren’t you supposed to be a LIBERTARIAN?  Since when did any form of libertarian believe that government-run health care is a good idea.

  • Oh, I don’t know…call me simplistic, but I think if the government and the compliant insurance companies would get completely out of the health care business so hospitals and doctors could only charge what the local economies could bear that the price of health care would drop dramatically and be available to everyone!

    But, that’s just me.

  • *SIGH*

    You know, I know,  we know that you need to have a “big tent” in order to have some lasting success as a party.

    But I guess there’s a limit on how big the tent should be before you tell someone to either stay out, or to get the f**k out.

    We just ran the most non-republican  candiate we had, and we lost.

    So why not stand on principle?

    Look, purges are stupid and counter productive 99% of the time. But this is the 1% where it makes sense. You’re in the absolute powerless minority. What do you have to lose?

  • Principles are really just abstract guesses.

    What abject idiocy. I take this to be an admission that you have no principles. What kind of a man are you anyway??!?

     as the GOP continues to move towards permanent minority status

    Yeah, yeah and this time 4 years ago I was reading just the same about the Dems.

  •  I take this to be an admission that you have no principles.

    Me, too. Not that it was a surprise.

  • Oh, I don’t know…call me simplistic, but I think if the government and the compliant insurance companies would get completely out of the health care business so hospitals and doctors could only charge what the local economies could bear that the price of health care would drop dramatically and be available to everyone!

    That’s true to a degree.  It will lower prices for certain services like setting broken limbs, stitching up cuts, and prescribing antibiotics and other drugs.  Along with the lower prices will come fewer services.  If all the economy will support is the few basic services i just mentioned what happens when that guy shows up in the emergency room needing open heart surgery but the closest cardiologist is 200 miles away and the guy in the emergency room can’t afford the flight and the doc can’t get there in time?  He dies.  You would also lose neurosurgeons and anybody else with specialized skills since they either won’t have any business because people can’t afford their services or nobody want’s to put the time in effort into it for mediocre profits.  Don’t expect any cure for cancer to be developed under this system unless R&D is to be 100% gov funded.

    I do believe that there are certain services that should never be the burden of the health insurers simply because they are either not life saving or they only provide a minimal life extension where the quality of that life is debatable.  If these were cut then that would save the insurers tons of money and probably cut down on the  malpractice suits as well.

    • I think there are open heart and brain surgeons that want to live in a diversity of communities, not just NY or LA. A $100, 000.00 house in Mississippi cost $1,500,000.00 in NY or LA. and people get sick everywhere. As far as the guy showing up with a life threatening attack and having to get to a doctor 200 miles away…that’s standard fair all over rural America right now. We simply need more competition in the medical marketplace. What we have now is a systemic cancer on the entire medical industry that has been manipulated and abused by federal intervention into, not only the medical side of things but the medical insurers as well. And the Federal Government is preparing now to metastasize  throughout the rest of the system. If the cycle is not stopped the whole system will end up in utter ruin. Dead. Your argument, is in some ways, the same as the auto industry is presenting. The truth is, IMHO, that the Medical industry, like the auto industry, like many state governments, have priced themselves out of business.

      As far as a cure for cancer goes…I’ve been waiting since Nixon and that really has nothing to do with everyday health care. The only place we will ever find a cure from cancer, again in my humble opinion, will be from  a non-government funded private industry. Where almost everything of any value actually comes from anyway.  

  • The last thing we need is for the US to become more like GM.

  • Could somebody please explain to me how we can genuinely know “what the people want” short of having elections?

    And how will elections work if every candidate says, “Well, I’ve got some principles, but I’ll ditch them in a moment to give you what you want”?

    As McQ says, there isn’t even a point in having representative bodies: just have some sort of giant computer system that can determine the cost of everything the people (allegedly) want, hold huge numbers of referendums, and leave it at that.

    BTW, if everybody wants nationalized health care, then why do libs spend so much time trying to convince people how wonderful and inexpensive it would be?