3/14 - 3/21 Upcoming events with The Democratic National Committee

 

Here are some ways you can take action. Sun, Mar 17 @ 2:30pm Belmont for Democracy calls Wisconsin › Sat, Mar 16 @ 9am · Swing Blue Alliance Activate Parents — Register PA Youth › Sat, Mar 16 @ 2pm · Swing Blue Alliance Activate Parents — Register PA Youth › Sat, Mar 23 @ 10am · Swing Blue Alliance Swing Blue Alliance March Frontline Update › Sun, Mar 17 @ 12pm · Swing Blue Alliance Activate Parents — Register PA Youth › Sun, Mar 17 @ 12:30pm · Swing Blue Alliance Help PA Voters get their Mail-In Ballots! › All times Eastern

Paid for by the Democratic National Committee, democrats.org. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. Powered by

BLAST FROM THE PAST- ETHICS AND MORALITY. HEALTH CARE. PT 1.

 

HEALTH CARE-  PT 1.

I am not going to begin this regular feature by providing a definition that will no doubt bore most readers. In the future, I will define such words, but I would rather open up with a practical article. 

The theme, "When does personal belief conflict with the best interests of society as a whole." 

The subject- Health Care.

Providing Health Insurance to every person residing in the U.S. and its' Territories, is not an economic question. 

If the federal government creates a program to provide minimal guaranteed medical coverage, 

funding must be there to support those who cannot afford traditional private plans. 

This is the Heart of the matter, and the dilemmas we must face are;

• Do we, as a society, have an obligation to provide minimal affordable medical care to all.
• That many people will, through taxation, provide a service that will be of direct benefit to others and not them personally.
• That in the question of the right or wrong of a given situation, choosing a moral stand is;

              1) The responsibility of the individual who is a member of society.

              2) The obligation of the governing body in society, which is a collection

              of individuals.

To illustrate what I mean, here is an example.  Let us say an individual decides all questions of morality will be answered from a Doctrine based upon the teachings of a given faith.  Now such decisions have two distinct implications;

• Is the individual going to decide the morality of any given situation solely by religious instruction and nothing else. If not, they have invalidated their own moral code, for it is not universally applied. It contradicts any assertion that the doctrine of their faith, regarding morality, is to be accepted absolutely.
• Does the individual wish to establish this system of morality for all of society, and punish any deviations.

 If society is populated by a majority of such citizens, what will be the outcome?

SEE PART 2.

THE YEAR: 2100. THE PLACE: HISTORY CLASS. THE SUBJECT: EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY POLITICS. PART 1.

 

THE YEAR IS 2100. HIGH SCHOOL FRESHMAN.

WELCOME TO AMERICAN HISTORY. TODAY WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN OUR STUDY

OF EARLY 21ST CENTURY POLITICS. TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU ALREADY KNOW, BELOW

ARE THE RESULTS OF THE 2008,2012,2016,2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. YOUR JOB IS

TO MATCH THE NUMBERS IN THE FIRST THREE COLUMNS.

- % OF THE NATIONAL VOTE FOR ALL 8 DEM./REP. CANDIDATES.

- WINNERS VICTORY MARGIN IN % OF VOTE.

-  WINNERS VICTORY MARGIN IN # OF VOTES.

WITH THE CORRESPONDING OUTCOMES.

- # OF ELECTORAL VOTES FOR THE WINNER.

- # OF STATES CARRIED BY THE WINNER.

AFTER THEY ARE GRADED, WE WILL DISCUSS THE SIGNIFICANCE IF EACH. THERE

WILL BE A SPECIAL LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF ELECTION FRAUD, AND SEE IF 

ANY OF THESE RESULTS LEND CREDENCE TO SUCH ACCUSATIONS. 

GOOD LUCK.

  BOTH CANDIDATES.                           WINNER.                                               WINNER.

   % NATIONAL VOTE                     VICTORY MARGIN %                         VICTORY MARGIN #

1- OBAMA, 2008, 52.9%                1-OBAMA, 2008, +7.2%                    1- OBAMA, 2008, +9,550,193

2- BIDEN, 2020, 51.3%                   2- BIDEN, 2020, +4.4%                     2- BIDEN, 2020, +7,058,637

3- OBAMA, 2012, 51.06%              3- OBAMA, 2012, +3.86                    3- OBAMA, 2012, +4,982,291

4- CLINTON, 2016, 48.18%           4-  TRUMP, 2016, -2.09%                   4- TRUMP, 2016, -2,868,686  

5- ROMNEY, 2012, 47.20%

6- TRUMP, 2020, 46.90%

7- TRUMP, 2016, 46.09%

8- MCCAIN, 2008, 45.70%

          WINNER.                                                                                          WINNER.

MOST ELECTORAL VOTES.                                                                CARRIED MOST STATES

365                                                                                                   30 + ME-02       

332                                                                                                            28 + DC + NE-02   

306                                                                                                            26 + DC    

304                                                                                                            25 + DC + NE-02

REMEMBER THIS? A LOOK BACK ON A SHORT TWITTER POST.

 

WHAT THEY SAID:  

"There are two sets of rules in America today: one for anyone named Biden, Obama, or Clinton, and then a different set of rules for the rest of us," Rep. Jim Banks says.

WHAT I SAID:

Yes, I agree. The GOP plays by the rules of Fascism: Don't like the election result: Overthrow the government. Get a subpoena: Ignore it. Caught doing something illegal: Blame Law Enforcement. Investigation Incriminates You: Witch Hunt. Wealthy Tax Cheats- IRS is at fault.

It is the STALIN/HITLER/TRUMP CODE OF MORAL AND INTELLECTUAL COWARDICE.