Chuck Asay by Chuck Asay
- August 07, 2009
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
- Next feature
- Current
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson
Tony Auth by Tony Auth
About Chuck Asay
Chuck Asay sifts the events of the day through his biblical worldview and tries to persuade readers to see things his way...that rights are given by a higher authority than the governments of men, that mankind is not the ultimate arbiter of truth and that our Constitutional Republic is worth protecting. Chuck believes ideas, not politicians rule the world. He tries to protect ideas which he thinks are good and attacks ideas he thinks bring harm.
© 2009 Creators Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (48) Jump to Comments Form
4uk4ata said, 3 months ago
Wow, Asay is really going out on a limb here. So now liberals want to kill all old people? How… nice and tasteful.
landshark67 said, 3 months ago
Soylent Green is People!!
Ian Valenzuela
said,
3 months ago
Psst, Chuck… Old people are ALREADY on government healthcare. it’s called Medicare. Ask them if they like it. The blatant scare tactics of the Republicans do not really promote public discourse. If you have an alternative fix for the horrible health care crisis America is in, please offer it. If your only argument is to deny there is a problem, tell a lie about your opponent’s position, and then shout the lie loud enough that people cannot hear the truth, then you have already lost the debate.
Kingoswald
said,
3 months ago
So is there a proposal on the table to extend Medicare to all?
tpenna
said,
3 months ago
Wow. This sort of nonsense has been debunked completely. The only people who still believe the government is interested in euthanizing (which I suppose Asay means when he uses the term “eugenics” which typically has to do with reproduction, not geriatrics) old people are either misled or are intentionally misleading people.
Asay’s Bible has a bit to say about bearing false witness.
cabrobst said, 3 months ago
The reason many people like me can’t have any health care at all is because Republicans and blue dogs are in the pay of the Insurance and Pharmaceutical company Executives.
Vote them out!!
cjr53 said, 3 months ago
Why are the republicans so bent on not helping fellow Americans. I’d rather spend the money used up in Iraq to help Americans.
And, how much has Iraq contributed to our National Deficit? When will it end?
michael
said,
3 months ago
This cartoon comes from a debunked internet rumor that sick old people would be refused medical treatment under the new health care plan.
striper77 said, 3 months ago
I have heard the following statement numerous times by the left.
Why are the republicans so bent on not helping fellow Americans?
This is incorrect. The republicans want to help out the fellow citizen. They went in great detail on health care. It was through helping small to medium businesses. Currently the most inexpensive insurance that you have to pay for is through you job. This was spoken numerous times.
The democrats version is as follows:
Do whatever you want. (Drop out of high school)
Have as many kids as possible by as many different partners as possible.
Do not work.
Do not pay taxes.
Get addicted to alcohol and drugs.
Do not get married.
Then we will help you out. We will give you free housing, welfare checks, food stamps, vouchers for your utility bills, insurance for your kids, free health clinics for your personal insurance needs, Medicaid and Social Security if you qualify. All of this for free.
The democrats know that these people will be to lazy or unmotivated to take advantage of all the benefits. It is to hard for them to go down to the local DHS office and fill out the paperwork. This will cause a public outcry, then the democrats will take over and attempt to get the Obamacare on the books.
HOWGOZIT said, 3 months ago
By the leftwing posts here it shows they do not know the wording in the so-called healthcare reform bill.
harleyquinn
said,
3 months ago
What do you respect when you take a system that works and try to make it into the failed socialist programs that are around the world. For them, the failed program, death consoler are a real thing and considering no one has read that 1000 page government take over I would not be surprised to find it within those pages.
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
HQ, you and I may not have read the 1000 page healthcare bill(s) percolating thru Congress, but it’s not loke “no one” has! Lots and lots and lots of people have, and the contents of the bill is available on the internet.
Asay gives himself away when he says “sometime…perhaps…not-too-distant future…”. There is nothing, nothing in the bill that indicates anything that Asay is implying. Since he has no facts, he uses conjecture that this could possibly lead to this if all the planets line up and etc.
HQ gives himself away in the same manner when he says that since, um, no one has ever read the bill, he “wouldn’t be surprised” to find geriatric euthenasia in those pages. Well, as an American, I WOULD be surprised, so I look it up, find absolutely no basis for the conjecture. So I know it isn’t true. I don’t have to be surprised. I’m informed.
Try it sometime, HQ. Information, I mean. Then your posts can be something other than scared moaning.
Kylop said, 3 months ago
Striper 77 may I ask…
“…The republicans want to help out the fellow citizen….”
Who qualifies as a “fellow citizen”?
DrCanuck said, 3 months ago
ezdeb points out the “perhaps” in the caption. Similar to the ads being run on TV: you “might” be squeezed, you “might” see your taxes increase, you “might” see a rationing of services. (And monkeys “might” fly out of your butt. Hey, it COULD happen.) Pure scare tactics in an absence of real information.
harleyquinn
said,
3 months ago
so ezeb what would you say if I posted the page that these death consoler are on? but then you would not be believe anyway. so why bother, you did not read it, you are only going with this change flow.
I am just pointing out that when you follow the failed socialist methods of other countries they have them. so if it is not in there it will come to be.
Anthony 2816
said,
3 months ago
The truth that Striper is hoping you’ll ignore:
http://tinyurl.com/npt5gb
bgarner
said,
3 months ago
For someone with a biblical worldview Asay should be considering the parable of the good Samaratin and how American is collectively passing by on the other side of the road compared to the rest of the G8. He should also consider how Americans are being ripped off by their health care system compared to the rest of G8 paying around 50% more per head as a percentage of GDP.
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
HQ: “so ezeb what would you say if I posted the page that these death consoler are on?” Well, HQ, go ahead and post the page! Seriously. I really want to see it. If it’s in there, and I can verify it, I’ll believe it. That would be information I haven’t yet seen, if it’s really there.
Does anyone think HQ can get away with saying he WOULD prove his destructive accusations, but no one would believe it so why bother? HQ’s unbelievably inferior tactic:
Bald-faced lie/assertion
Questioning by the person confused by being lied to
Patronizing dismissal that the questions COULD be answered, but HQ can’t be bothered.
Are you a dad, HQ? If so, did you follow this tactic with your assertions when issues came up? If so, do your children now understand that your puffing up and showing your spines does not make your assertions any more respectable?
edrush said, 3 months ago
OH, now I get it. Asay wants to use enhanced health care to get old people to breed.
striper77 said, 3 months ago
Anthony,
You are getting your information from the left and I am getting my information from the right.
If you look at the history of the democrats and republicans. You watch the way they vote and the campain they ran.
Democrats
Abortion, gay rights, higher taxes, smaller military, big government, more laws, fine print, leans towards or completely in bed with the liberals, NEA, ACLU, NGLTF, NAACP, etc.
Republicans
Pro-family, Pro-life, lower taxes, larger military, smaller government, less laws, leans towards conservatives, etc.
In summary when the liberals are foaming at the mouth that their bill is not for everything they stand for, I am not going to believe them.
wbr said, 3 months ago
dear 4uk- that what dr zeke says
right artyd2 let get rid of all nut jobs – where are they sending you
secondson said, 3 months ago
artyd2, lets round all those with differing opinions up and send them to places we can call things like Auschwitz and Treblinka. Your mentor would be proud of that thinking.
harleyquinn
said,
3 months ago
Sorry ez it is in there
“The controversy stems from a proposal to pay physicians who counsel elderly or terminally ill patients about what medical interventions they would prefer near the end of life and how to prepare instructions such as living wills. Under the plan, Medicare would reimburse doctors for one session every five years to confer with a patient about his or her wishes and how to ensure those preferences are followed. The counseling sessions would be voluntary.”
I am not drumming up scare tactics but why would it not be in there when we are talking about a bill that is to save us money?
But you just keep going un informed chanting change and hope and see how much is taken from you.
harleyquinn
said,
3 months ago
http://tinyurl.com/m3jke7
GNWachs
said,
3 months ago
There is so much misinformation and naivety around it is frightening. Much of the world has experience with central or public health care systems. The naivety is the left refuse to learn from their experiences.
it is expensive- very very expensive. Every single place that has tried it has come to the realization. Look at our own Massachusetts.
When you look at what others have tried to control the expense and read the proposed bills certain conclusions have been drawn.
If you could spend $1M and give a 95 year old woman one extra day of life would you? I would assume everyone here would say no. If you spent $1000 and saved a 1 year old and gave them a normal life, would you? I assume everyone here would say yes.
The problems arise where to draw that line. What other countries have done is say once you reach a certain age- 65?-70?-75? we will no longer be as aggressive in treating your disease. 75 year old with prostate cancer. spend $100,000 for definitive surgery as compared to palliative treatment? If I were on the committee I would vote no.
So what Asay is alluding to here is when we get a public option or subsidized care or extended Medicare or etc the decision will have to be made to limit the care elderly receive. If the person is wealthy and wishes to spend his own money he will be able to do so. Thus tiered medical care. New problem. solution?
What I sincerely ask of the liberals is exactly where is the money going to come from. I don’t want fairy tales answers. The average profit margin of private health insurance companies is 4%. Totally eliminating that will provide a tiny fraction of what is needed. Negotiating with pharmaceutical houses will provide an even smaller percentage of expense. Where is the $1T coming from? There has been no realistic answer given because if we were to hear honesty the entire program would be rejected. What we are hearing instead is to use an analogy you want to buy a $250,000 new car. Where do you get the money. Instead of my going to Applebees I will go to McDonalds. and I will only drink 6 bottles of beer instead of 8.
Be honest, how do we pay? And remember the bill has to pass Congress.
Anthony 2816
said,
3 months ago
Wow, based on HQ’s link, he’s finally seen the light!
Striper, you avoided addressing ANY of the issues of what I posted, and instead just posted your usual bigoted drivel.
One can only guess why.
It’s because you can’t.
Look at what you listed for “Republicans”
“Pro-family”
Sorry, Republicans have been pushing for the biggest federal intrusions into anti-family law (a traditionally state law issue) ever.
“Pro-life”
Only pre-fetal-life. Otherwise, they love killing.
“lower taxes”
You are SUCH a liar. “Read my lips; no new taxes!”
“larger military”
Which we wouldn’t need if we didn’t launch unprovoked attacked on sovreign nations.
“smaller government, less laws, leans towards conservatives, etc.”
Have you really been that blind during the last eight years. Really????
Don’t worry about responding to this message. I know you won’t, and if you do, it’ll completely ignore all the points I made. Meanwhile, it’ll show everyone once again how worthless your bigoted lying posts are.
charliekane said, 3 months ago
Eugenics? Holy Wrath of Khan, Dr. Bashir!
Chuck’s really got his head up his Asay on this one!
striper77 said, 3 months ago
Anthony Stated,
“Pro-family”
Sorry, Republicans have been pushing for the biggest federal intrusions into anti-family law (a traditionally state law issue) ever.
????????????? There is a total of 40 republican senators. 31 of them vote profamily almost all the time. There are 58 democrats and 2 independents. They vote against the traditional family most of the time. Most of them vote against the traditional family all the time.
“Pro-life”, Only pre-fetal-life. Otherwise, they love killing.
This is incorrect. The do not love to kill anyone. They may be for the death penalty if someone kills people or numerous people in cold blood.
War if only necessary. Keep in mind the democrats approved both wars and they had the numbers to stop it at anytime (after 30 days).
“lower taxes” You are SUCH a liar. “Read my lips; no new taxes!”
Bush 41 stated that and lost his next election due to that and Ross Perot. Then Clinton had the highest tax increase in American History. Obama’s is going to be even greater.
It is funny the more dialog I have with the left the more hostile the left becomes.
Anthony 2816
said,
3 months ago
Striper:
“Pro-family”: You didn’t address the issue at all. Family law has traditionally been a state law issue. Only when the Republicans started pushing federal intrusion into family law has it been otherwise. Why do the Republicans insist on big intrusive federal government?
“Pro-life”: Tell your position to the families who lost loved ones whose lives were wasted in Iraq. “They may be for the death penalty”? Nuff said.
“lower taxes”: “Bush 41 stated that and lost his next election.” Good. Glad we agree on this one.
“It is funny the more dialog I have with the left the more hostile the left becomes.” Hostile merely meaning that they’re against your bigotry and lies.
By the way, you STILL avoided addressing ANY of the issues of what I posted earlier, and instead just posted your usual bigoted drivel. Cut and pastes work well with you because of this.
tpenna
said,
3 months ago
To be fair, striper, people are getting more upset because attempting to engage you in rational debate is maddeningly impossible. I won’t bother addressing your illegitimate points, such as they are.
As for your posting, harleyquinn, it’s been debunked again and again. The non-partisan and Pulitzer Prize winning PolitiFact did it here (http://preview.tinyurl.com/l6abd8). Of course, this will make little difference to you, as you have repeatedly demonstrated an unwillingness to reconsider your beliefs in the face of evidence to the contrary.
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
HQ, I want to see the page you tell me allows euthenasia. I don’t want to see an analysis, right or left. You tell me the bill includes this threat. I want to see it. You won’t put up, and you won’t shut up.
HQ quotes: “Under the plan, Medicare would reimburse doctors for one session every five years to confer with a patient about his or her wishes and how to ensure those preferences are followed. The counseling sessions would be voluntary.” The patient’s wishes would be noted so that their preferences are followed? HQ, I’ll have to look up the definition of euthenasia (or eugenics for that matter!). Cuz I don’t think it means what you think it means.
So I’ll keep chanting “hope and change”, which, I guess are bad things for America. You keep chanting “no no no no no”, K?
harleyquinn
said,
3 months ago
Last time ez all i said is i am looking at what has failed elsewhere. We are trying to do that here. Where it has failed they do have euthanasia or at least cut off where you are to old go sit over there.
But really that can not happen here?
OUT!
striper77 said, 3 months ago
Anthony looking at Chuck Assay 8/7/09 your first remark was a web site from salon.com that agreed with the left on the Obamacare. I then stated the conservative right is saying the exact opposite and had some examples.
You then mentioned about family law at state level. I believe you are in CA. I do not live in CA. You have a moderate republican governor not a conservative. Your state is one of the most liberal states in the union. The last time a Republican president won their was with Reagan when he ran against a democrat talk show host. At the state level I am assuming you have mostly liberal democrats and a mix of conservative and moderate republicans that is not in control of either house or senate. So I do not know where you are getting you info. on they are pushing anti-family legislative.
The war issue was addressed. It was approved by both Republican and Democrat. The President can only go to war for 30 days without congress approval. The republicans never had 60 senators under Bush. The last two years of Bush the Democrats had the power in the House and Senate. The war still went on. The Democrats could of stopped it any time and failed to do so.
The democrats have the house, senate and president. Since they have been in control we had the deadliest month over their.
You may have had some other information out their today and it got removed or you could be posting on numerous sites. Yesterday you hit a five points in favor of the left that the Democrat Senator Reid from NV stated as well. The remark was from the Obama administrations. They are going to attempt to use that in all the town hall meetings.
dtroutma said, 3 months ago
The Republican plan has an ice patch waiting for Assay. In comparing the proposed legislation to the horror stories of Striper and Assay’s conclusion, there is no relevance whatever- hysterical shouting, in writing or print, is just that.
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
HQ: “all I said is…”
a lie.
fennec said, 3 months ago
FGS, if I’m at the point of life maintenance at the cost of horrible pain and no quality of life, let me go! (I’ve been througH this with both my parents who asked for it, but I was unable to accede to their request..)
Anthony 2816
said,
3 months ago
Striper, all that typing and once again you didn’t address the points.
Family law: List all the federal intrusions into this traditionally state-law subject. If you can’t do it, I’ll give you a hint: It’s the Republicans, with their intrusive anti-marriage laws.
Pro-life: Tell us again how the Democrats could have stopped Bush from wasting thousands of our troops’ lives?
Lower taxes: You didn’t even bother.
Smaller government, less laws: You didn’t even bother.
By the way, among all the misinformation you post, get this straight: The California Central Valley, and many other areas outside of LA and SF, are some of the most conservative areas of the country.
harleyquinn
said,
3 months ago
I agree fennec, but do you need the government to hold your hand for such a decision?
Bob Wells said, 3 months ago
Massachusetts has a GREAT health program…run by a Republican governor…why don’t you libs check it out instead of blanket-blaming Reps for all the damage you’ve caused with your overspending, and let government do it all for you.
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
bob, your argument would hold more water if it wasn’t the Republican party itself tearing away at the healthcare reform attempt by Massachusetts. I’m not sure if you are being sarcastic in the word GREAT, cuz you seem to be making two different points in your post.
Republicans love to snicker at Massachusetts and it’s liberal policies; I don’t hear much bad from Dems. What are you trying to say? Maybe it’s a mistake to ask, but it’s a thing I have as a progressive. I want to know different points of view.
vhammon
said,
3 months ago
GNWachs…Where did you get the statistic that for profit health insurance companies only have an average 4% profit margin.
Elizabeth Edwards noted several years ago the CEO of United Health, which insures 70 million Americans, makes one of every $700 spent on health insurance. Of course, that is a company expense and comes before profits are calculated.
On Bill Moyers, Wendell Potter, a former VP of CIGNA said that 20 years ago , 95% of every insurance dollar went to pay for care. With the advent of for profit ‘managed care,’ now about 85% of every insurance dollar goes to actual health care. The rest is going to ‘management’ - insurance bureaucrats with a mandate to screen out expenses and increase profits.
The profit driven health insurance industry creates a considerable amount of expense that simply would not exist if we allowed doctors to treat, and a single-payer to pay.
GNWachs
said,
3 months ago
@vhammon WSJ article last few days but you have the figures in your 2nd paragraph. 85% health care 11% administration and 4% profit.
But of course with any government administration the 11% figure would probably be double. Unions, pensions, phantom jobs etc. There is nothing in this world less efficient than government.
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
Unless you lose your medicare and have nothing. THAT’s less efficient!
GNWachs
said,
3 months ago
^ How do you lose medicare?
Also see no response from you on false rape figures I posted. Too surprised to answer?
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
I responded thus, fool
You believe almost 50% of women falsely accuse men of rape. And to top that off, you quote me a link to…wait for it…FOXnews! So I’m totally convinced, and your cynical view of women and their rampant manipulation of mens’ tender emotions are law. Let’s just say you impressd me and I was too surprised to answer, and you got me.
Let’s move on, K?
ezdeb said, 3 months ago
You could lose your medicare if government-run single payor insurance plans are outlawed as communist by right-wingers. They want to take away my grannie’s only income and leave her with no way to buy her pills. You COULD lose it, sometime in the future, fear fear fear. Sound familiar?
How do you lose medicare? When no reform ever happens, the status quo winds down and people say they never thought it would happen.
GNWachs
said,
3 months ago
Here are 2 stories from NYT and CBS both found within 1 day. So you still think false accusations of rape don’t occur? You are still living back in 1950 Iowa. 23 years in Prison because of a false accusation.
If you don’t trust Fox how about CBS
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12040521
This one is from NYT. Do you trust the Times or are they too right wing?
Texan Is Released After 23 Years
A 46-year-old man walked out of prison in Houston Friday after spending 23 years behind bars for a sex crime that the evidence suggests he did not commit.
The man, Ernest Sonnier, was sentenced to life in prison largely on the strength of the victim’s testimony, even though evidence showed that someone with a different blood type had raped her, lawyers said. Judge Michael McSpadden of Harris County District Court ordered Sonnier to be freed pending further investigation. (NYT
David
said,
3 months ago
Ahh, the inhumane subject of Eugenics surfaces in the last frame. I was wondering when I would see that term pop up again…especially because some of the Czars actually believe in that hogwash.
We’d better be very wary of what we’re opening the door up to in the name of “reform”.
One thing gives me a clue: Congressmen have exempted themselves from this new healthcare reform. Has anyone asked why?