Tag: Poleski

The Democrat party has been lost for some time to the progressive freak show that carries a disconnect about its intent and actions.  While griping about money in elections by big corporations, it calls out for bigger government that attracts such mechanisms.  While it decries the high cost of insurance and medical care, it uses the tools of government to discourage entry into the field of medicine, thus raising the cost.  While promising no mouth goes unfed, it has provided a trough that keeps the hands associated with those mouths idle and unproductive so they cannot feed themselves. Constantly the 'civil rights' violations, through our social compacts, are heralded as wrong, yet murdering of those who can least defend themselves is their rallying action. And at the same time that its activists want us out of their bedrooms, they put their genitalia in our faces and into our school programming.

Its a bizarro world.

Its a strange place and time, and I don't recognize my country or state any longer.  When the lies become the truth, and the truth is decried as meaningless, and a (very unhealthy)gun is put to our heads, so that someone who has made poor choices with regard to their own health care might be made better.

But it didn't hurt so much until the last 2 decades, and the damage was somewhat limited until the Republicans allowed it to become mainstream.

The Republican state representative from Troy discusses the possibility of abolishing the Michigan civil service commission. The commission, he argues, has "ignored the constitution, the Legislature, the will of the people and common sense."  From the Detroit News commentary:

"Let me explain. The Civil Service Commission recently included "other eligible individuals and their dependents" as recipients of state health care benefits. This is ridiculous. These could include any roommate, distant cousin, or live-in boyfriend or girlfriend. The only requirement for this $4,000 to $17,000 yearly health care benefit package is that they must live with a state employee for a year. What a deal and at the expense of the taxpayer."

Indeed.

And it seems to follow the point on legitimacy of 'marriage' being used as a term for the unions of same sex couples.  Its about the money.  And in this case they step even further out onto the fringe.  That fringe, as in 'fringe benefits' for all who seemingly associate with state government workers.  Whether or not we can afford it, or if it even makes sense.