Bipartisanship for our lifetime...

So I heard Representative Eric Cantor (Virginia) state earlier this week his intention to repeal Obamacare and replace it with Cantorcare, which, apparently, means that only the "popular" provisions, i.e. requiring insurance companies to provide coverage to people with pre-existing conditions AND requiring companies that provide insurance to children to cover those children to the age of 26.

I don't know if Cantor thinks he can compromise with Obama, and that maybe this will be a way to get a less-bad law in place of the current one, but this current batch of Democrats have proven time and again that they do not honor their commitments.  And if they do succeed, then their fingerprints will be on the destruction of our health care and health insurance markets.  Consider:

• Insurance for pre-existing conditions is not insurance, it is welfare.  Insurance is when you pay into a common risk pool to cover future (unknown) risks.  If it's something you already have, then it's not a risk, it is a reality, and to have someone else pay for your reality is welfare, not insurance.
• Children to the age of 26.  So what is already happening here is companies are beginning to refuse to offer policies on children.  Nevermind the classification of a 26 year old person as a child, but in our current nanny-state country, that somehow seems to fit.

The real problem here is that they are not "forcing" insurance companies to do squat, they are "prohibiting" me from entering into agreements with those companies under terms outside of what they "deem" acceptable.  Who are those idiots to decide for me?

I will never support any Democrat because of what they have collectively done to my country these past 4 years that they've controlled Congress.  For the Republicans to repeal the abominable restrictions on my freedom in Obamacare I expect and demand.  But for them to replace it with their own version will force me to refuse to support them either.  Ever.  Might not be a bad thing for me to give up my interest in politics.

to paraphrase Orwell, "The voters outside looked from democrat to republican, and from republican to democrat, and from democrat to republican again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

A Better Health Care Bill of Rights

1. No law shall be passed granting any group or entity any tax incentive or advantage that exceeds the tax benefit received by an individual citizen of the united states.

2. Neither the federal government nor any of its states shall pass nor enforce any law which prohibits a citizen from purchasing any health insurance policy under any terms that citizen desires.

Minimum mandates are really restrictions on the rights of the consumers to purchase what they wish by disallowing insurance companies from offering products that the consumers want. These restrictions are immoral and should not be given the force of law.

3. No citizen shall be required to finance the health care of any other citizen.

The role of charity is to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves, and the role of the recipients of charity is gratitude towards those extending the charity. Thus, both the giver and recipient benefit from the transaction. When, however, one entity takes by force from another to give to the needy the taker steals from the producer both the resources already produced and the goodwill and gratitude that would have been due the producer for providing for the needy. Come on, people, this is self-evident and so obvious.

4. No citizen shall be forced at any time to submit to medical treatment against his will without due process.

As recently as 1981 the State of Oregon was forcibly sterilizing persons deemed unsuitable to reproduce by its "Board of Eugenics." Members of Christian Science whose religious faith prohibits invasive medical treatment have their religious tenants violated when forced to submit to medical care.

5. No health care provider may be compelled to either provide or withhold medical treatment from a patient.

Since health care provider provides a service of economic or financial value the 13th Amendment already prohibits forcing a person to work against his will. The existence of laws in violation of this principal throughout the country and the failure of the courts to uphold this principal when the work provided is medical in nature is evidence that this principal needs to be explicitly extended to this arena.