Let Them Eat Shakes!

Quick Quiz!

By a show of hands, who remembers the man featured in the photo above? 

Hey, put your hands down, I was kidding.  It's not like I can actually SEE you through that video camera on your laptop or anything... 

Or, can I???  Hmm, I wonder...

I cannot, of course, but just between you and me?  You might want to knock that cowlick down on the left side of your head if you plan on going out in public today. 

Today's post has absolutely nothing to do with your hair, that unblinking camera lens above your laptop monitor, or my ability to see you. 

Today's post has more to do with those people who CAN see you.

"They see you when you're smoking,
They know when you over-eat,
They see if you're on Blood Pressure meds,
They know if your knees are weak..."

In case you've forgotten who this guy is, allow me to call upon a series of 0's and 1's to decode the following digital representation of the wit and wisdom of... 

 

Alan Grayson's "Die Quickly" Speech

In defense of Alan Grayson - D, FL, (ousted in 2010) he was 50% correct in his assessment of the state of health care in the Nation.  From a purely statistical perspective, this makes him roughly 10 times more accurate than the majority of members in his party.  

His mistake, of course, was in saying that it is Republicans who want folks to 'Die quickly'.  The rest of what he said was pretty much dead on based upon what I read this morning. 

Yes, I am here today to tell you that:

Alan Grayson is a Visionary

 

I'll give you a few moments while you clear the milk you just sprayed out your nose off the keyboard. 

 

Again, just between you and me, you missed some.  Grab a paper towel and dry that spot just above your shirt pocket.  Cleanliness IS close to Godliness you know... 

 

And as I type this, I find myself a little closer to God than I was just yesterday.

 

ASSOCIATED PRESS, JANUARY 26, 2012:  Do penalties for smokers and the obese make sense?

 

NEW YORK (AP) -- Faced with the high cost of caring for smokers and overeaters, experts say society must grapple with a blunt question:

 

Instead of trying to penalize them and change their ways, why not just let these health sinners die prematurely from their unhealthy habits?
 

Annual health care costs are roughly $96 billion for smokers and $147 billion for the obese, the government says. These costs accompany sometimes heroic attempts to prolong lives, including surgery, chemotherapy and other measures.
 

But despite these rescue attempts, smokers tend to die 10 years earlier on average, and the obese die five to 12 years prematurely, according to various researchers' estimates.
 

"This is my life. I should be able to do what I want," said Sebastian Lopez, a college student from Queens, speaking last September when the New York City Board of Health approved the soda size rules.  [Moos Note:  No one has seen Sebastian since he made this comment  - nah, just kidding.]
 

Critics also contend that tobacco- and calorie-control measures place a disproportionately heavy burden on poor people. That's because they:
 

- Smoke more than the rich, and have higher obesity rates.
 

- Have less money so sales taxes hit them harder. One study last year found poor, nicotine-dependent smokers in New York - a state with very high cigarette taxes - spent as much as a quarter of their entire income on smokes.

- Are less likely to have a car to shop elsewhere if the corner bodega or convenience store stops stocking their vices.

...

There always seems to be a fight whenever this kind of public health legislation comes up. And it's a fight that can go in all sorts of directions. For example, some studies even suggest that because smokers and obese people die sooner, they may actually cost society less than healthy people who live much longer and develop chronic conditions like Alzheimer's disease. 
.
So let's return to the original question: Why provoke a backlash? If 1 in 5 U.S. adults smoke, and 1 in 3 are obese, why not just get off their backs and let them go on with their (probably shortened) lives?

...

From an economist's perspective, there would be less reason to grouse about unhealthy behaviors by smokers, obese people, motorcycle riders who eschew helmets and other health sinners if they agreed to pay the financial price for their choices.
 
That's the rationale for a provision in the Affordable Care Act - "Obamacare" to its detractors - that starting next year allows health insurers to charge smokers buying individual policies up to 50 percent higher premiums.

A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums.
 
The new law doesn't allow insurers to charge more for people who are overweight, however.  [Moos Note:  Well, at least not YET]
 
It's tricky to play the insurance game with overweight people, because science is still sorting things out. While obesity is clearly linked with serious health problems and early death, the evidence is not as clear about people who are just overweight.

...


That said, public health officials shouldn't shy away from tough anti-obesity efforts, said Callahan, the bioethicist. Callahan caused a public stir this week with a paper that called for a more aggressive public health campaign that tries to shame and stigmatize overeaters the way past public health campaigns have shamed and stigmatized smokers.
 
National obesity rates are essentially static, and public health campaigns that gently try to educate people about the benefits of exercise and healthy eating just aren't working, Callahan argued. We need to get obese people to change their behavior. If they are angry or hurt by it, so be it, he said.
.

Should I shift gears and jump into the debate over Gun Control and WHY people are hoarding weapons and ammunition over the past few years?  No.  I won't.  You can connect those particular 'dots' on your own. 

I'd like however to take a Left Turn towards a thought process which will solve ALL the problems referenced above.  I'm going to put on my Progressive Hat and use their logic to FIX the problems outlined above (you'll want to scrub your hands, face, and eyes with alcohol when you're done reading the section below):

How to fix!

• Obesity,
• Smoking,
• Insurance Costs,
• Over-Population,
• and, sure, why not? "Global Climate Change"

Allow me to use the  AP logic to fix the ills of society today:

• Cut all Federal Subsidies to the Poor which go towards 'food' - people will eat less, lose weight, and Live Longer (unless, of course, they starve to death - but if they do, hey, they'll die 'the healthiest' they've been in YEARS!)
• Force manufacturers to lower the price of their cigarettes while implementing a higher TAX on them.  This does two things, First, it punishes the richest Americans for their bad habit, and Second, it still allows the Poor to obtain prescription narcotics via Welfare and / or Medicaid at their local physician's office, sell it on the street (at market prices) and allow them to continue to smoke - for FREE!  It's the compassionate thing to do - they needs thems smokes.
• Provide Abortion on Demand - regardless the age of ANY patient!  Unborn, Newly Born, Teenaged, Middle-Aged, Geriatric?  No problem!  All it takes is a 'relatively painless' needle stick and viola!  Good night Irene!   Pop 'em down the chute into the furnace - boom, done!
• Dozens of well-meaning and thoughtful Progressive Scientists agree with ME that the problem with the Earth is...  US!  If we weren't here mucking things up, the sacred Earth could continue upon it's merry way spinning, and spinning, and spinning, and...  (Any further elaboration would require scientific research and I'm not going there, okay?)
• In the end, by allowing people to starve while continuing to smoke, we'll reduce the surplus population, save the Earth, and make the World a better place - for the, um, World.  We, of course won't be here to see how things turn out.
• Now that I think about it, perhaps I should remain behind to make sure the Earth fully recovers from us?  I'm willing to do this not for myself, but for Mother Earth, Gaya, this Big Blue Marble spinning forever in space.  It's a sacrifice I'm willing to make. 
• As for the rest of you folks, let me know if you have any cool stuff at home because I'm coming to get it when you're gone...  YOU won't need it any more. 
• And don't expect me to bury you, I'll be chillin' with your XBox for days on end.  Just throw yourself into a fire or something when you begin to feel, really, really, bad, okay?   I don't want you laying around stinking up the place for me while I'm looting your home.  Thanks, that'd be great. 

No.  I don't want your stuff.  You keep it - I've got plenty of stuff of my own.  I guess in the end I ask you to keep your eyes open so you can see what's going on around you.  For example, if a Nationally known Politician is laughed off the national stage for using the phrase, 'Death Panels' to explain a provision of a national health care plan and a few years later you trip across an article which begins the way this one does - questioning whether the Fat or Smoking deserve to die???  Well, let's just say that in 2013 I don't believe in coincidences any longer. 

There are proponents of Eugenics in all levels of the Federal Government. They want people 'like them' to survive. 

And between you and me?  I'm not one of THEM.   

Hey, before I go, you've got a little bit of green stuff on your front tooth - salad at lunch today, huh?  Good for you.  Hope you had the Lite Ranch dressing (I see a little something on your collar).

Live long and prosper...  While you can, at least. 

Meet Maggie!!!

Aw, come on, knock it off!  You KNOW what I asked for!!!

So I sent my crack team from the MoosRoom to get a very specific image online and they come back with... 

A cartoon image of Maggie Simpson.

Super, thanks guys...

Honestly, if I PAID them anything, I'd want the money back; assuming, of course, they could remember where they put it... 

Well, if you want something done, you'd better do it yourself. 

Never send a calf to do a cow's job. 

Hold on, I'll be right back.

Holding...

Holding...

Holding...

Here we are - here's our girl now! 

Margaret Sanger - Founder of Planned Parenthood with excerpts from: "Woman in the New Race", published, 1920

  Infanticide did not go out of fashion with the advance from savagery to barbarism and civilization. Rather, it became, as in Greece and Rome, a recognized custom with advocates among leaders of thought and action. So did abortion, which some authorities regard as a development springing from infanticide and tending to supersede it as a means of getting rid of undesired children.   17

.

As progress is made toward civilization, infanticide, then, actually increased. This tendency was noted by Westermarck, who also calls attention to the conclusions of Fison and Howitt (in Kamilaroi and Kurnai). “Mr Fison who has lived for a long time among uncivilized races,” says Westermarck, “thinks it will be found that infanticide is far less common among the lower savages than among the more advanced tribes.”

.

SOURCE:  Women's Struggle for Freedom

...

.
What material is there for a greater American race? What elements make up our present millions? Where do they live? How do they live? In what direction does our national civilization bend their ideals? What is the effect of the “melting pot” upon the foreigner, once he begins to “melt”? Are we now producing a freer, juster, more intelligent, more idealistic, creative people out of the varied ingredients here?

Before we can answer these questions, we must consider briefly the races which have contributed to American population.

Among our more than 100,000,000 population are Negroes, Indians, Chinese and other colored people to the number of 11,000,000. There are also 14,500,000 persons of foreign birth. Besides these there are 14,000,000 children of foreign-born parents and 6,500,000 persons whose fathers or mothers were born on foreign soil, making a total of 46,000,000 people of foreign stock. Fifty per cent of our population is of the native white strain.

Source:  The Materials of the New Race

...

Women who have a knowledge of contraceptives are not compelled to make the choice between a maternal experience and a marred love life; they are not forced to balance motherhood against social and spiritual activities. Motherhood is for them to choose, as it should be for every woman to choose. Choosing to become mothers, they do not thereby shut themselves away from thorough companionship with their husbands, from friends, from culture, from all those manifold experiences which are necessary to the completeness and the joy of life.  16

Fit mothers of the race are these, the courted comrades of the men they choose, rather than the “slaves of slaves.” For theirs is the magic power—the power of limiting their families to such numbers as will permit them to live full-rounded lives. Such lives are the expression of the feminine spirit which is woman and all of her—not merely art, nor professional skill, nor intellect; but all that woman is, or may achieve.

Source:  Two Classes of Women

...


The woman of the workers knows what society does with her offspring. Knowing the bitter truth, learned in unspeakable anguish, what shall this woman say to society? The power is in her hands. She can bring forth more children to perpetuate these conditions, or she can withhold the human grist from these cruel mills which grind only disaster.  15

Shall she say to society that she will go on multiplying the misery that she herself has endured? Shall she go on breeding children who can only suffer and die? Rather, shall she not say that until society puts a higher value upon motherhood she will not be a mother? Shall she not sacrifice her mother instincts for the common good and say that until children are held as something better than commodities upon the labor market, she will bear no more? Shall she not give up her desire for even a small family, and say to society that until the world is made fit for children to live in, she will have no children at all?

SOURCE:  When Should a Woman Avoid Having Children

...

LABOR seems instinctively to have recognized the fact that its servitude springs from numbers. Seldom, however, has it applied its knowledge logically and thoroughly. The basic principle of craft unionism is limitation of the number of workers in a given trade. This has been labor’s most frequent expedient for righting its wrongs. Every unionist knows, as a matter of course, that if that number is kept small enough, his organization can compel increases of wages, steady employment and decent working conditions. Craft unionism has succeeded in attaining these insofar as it has been able to apply this principle. It has failed insofar as it has been unable to apply it.   1

The weakness of craft unionism is that it does not carry its principle far enough. It applies its policy of limitation of numbers only to the trade. In his home, the worker, whether he is a unionist or non-unionist, goes on producing large numbers of children to compete with him eventually in the labor market.

Even with the temporary advantages gained by the wiping out of millions of workers in the Great War, labor’s problem remains unsolved. It has now, as always, to contend with the crop of young laborers coming into the market, and with the ever-present “labor-saving” machine which, instead of relieving the worker’s situation, makes it all the harder for him to escape. Fewer laborers are needed to-day for a given amount of production and distribution than before the invention of these machines. Yet, owing to the increase in the number of the workers, labor finds itself enslaved instead of liberated by the machine.

SOURCE:  Will Birth Control Help the Cause of Labor?

...

This is the dawn. Womanhood shakes off its bondage. It asserts its right to be free. In its freedom, its thoughts turn to the race. Like begets like. We gather perfect fruit from perfect trees. The race is but the amplification of its mother body, the multiplication of flesh habitations—beautified and perfected for souls akin to the mother soul.   16

The relentless efforts of reactionary authority to suppress the message of birth control and of voluntary motherhood are futile. The powers of reaction cannot now prevent the feminine spirit from breaking its bonds. When the last fetter falls the evils that have resulted from the suppression of woman’s will to freedom will pass. Child slavery, prostitution, feeblemindedness, physical deterioration, hunger, oppression and war will disappear from the earth.   17

In their subjection women have not been brave enough, strong enough, pure enough to bring forth great sons and daughters. Abused soil brings forth stunted growths. An abused motherhood has brought forth a low order of humanity. Great beings come forth at the call of high desire. Fearless motherhood goes out in love and passion for justice to all mankind. It brings forth fruits after its own kind. When the womb becomes fruitful through the desire of an aspiring love, another Newton will come forth to unlock further the secrets of the earth and the stars. There will come a Plato who will be understood, a Socrates who will drink no hemlock, and a Jesus who will not die upon the cross. These and the race that is to be in America await upon a motherhood that is to be sacred because it is free.

SOURCE:  The Goal

Seriously, where to begin?

Perhaps a shower?  Not now, I've got to get this particular chore done.  

Margaret Sanger subscribed to the principles of something called, "Eugenics". 

What are Eugenic Principles? 

Spending a moment with Dictionary.com we find the following:

eugenics (yjĕn`ĭks), study of human genetics genetics, and of methods to improve the inherited characteristics, physical and mental, of the human race. Efforts to improve the human race through bettering housing facilities and other environmental conditions are known as euthenics.  

Sir Francis Galton Galton, Sir Francis , 1822–1911, English scientist, founder of eugenics; cousin of Charles Darwin. He turned from exploration and meteorology (where he introduced the theory of the anticyclone) to the study of heredity and eugenics (a term that he coined).  Galton introduced the term eugenics, is usually regarded as the founder of the modern science of eugenics; his emphasis was on the role of factors under social control that could either improve or impair the qualities of future generations.

Modern eugenics is directed chiefly toward the discouragement of propagation among the unfit (negative eugenics) and encouragement of propagation among those who are healthy, intelligent, and of high moral character (positive eugenics). Such a program involves many difficulties, especially that of defining which traits are most desirable.

The first half of the 20th cent. saw extreme coercive application of such principles by governments ranging from miscegenation laws and enforced sterilization of the insane in the United States and other nations to the Holocaust, the name given to the period of persecution and extermination of European Jews by Nazi Germany. Although anti-Semitism in Europe has a long history, persecution of German Jews began with Hitler's rise to power in 1933. 

Regulated eugenics continues in some parts of the world; China enacted restrictions on marriages involving persons with certain disabilities and diseases in 1994.


Margaret Sanger, the Founder of Planned Parenthood, believed that if you control the reproductive capabilities of the people who were having children, you could control the very FUTURE.  In her Progressive Utopian view, only the best, and brightest parents would pro-create, giving rise to future generations chocked full of Platos, Newtons, Socrates, and Jesus.

POINT OF CLARIFICATION:  I'm sorry, but after almost 100 YEARS of Planned Parenthood, I'm NOT seeing a whole lot of well-meaning Geniuses running around making our Nation a 'better place'.  

Might this Utopian 'disconnect' indicate that Margaret Sanger was, in the best case scenario, mis-guided, or at worst, a Racist-Idiot bent upon the extermination of what Hitler (another Eugenics-guy) later referred to as 'sub-Humans'?  Adolph should have checked HIS DNA prior to building those ovens of his (LINK). 

"Now seating, table for one, Mr. Hitler, table for one?"

Margaret was a Progressive Elitist Big-Brained type who, "As any enlightened person will know", (she used this phrase a LOT in her writings) also happened to be a moron. 

This does not, however, explain why our government continues to fund roughly $500 MILLION per year to HER progeny, Planned Parenthood.  Why would the US Government continue to pour money into an organization whose Mother was Racism, and whose Father was Arrogance? 

I've got a single-fingered salute saved for Ms. Sanger.  It's a shame she'll never see me give it to her.  I'm thinking there's another guy who's been having tea with her on a regular basis in a fiery, smelly, and 24x7 scary place.

Heil Hitler - Heil Sanger - Heil Progressives!

"What the heck am I pointing to?  How do I 'Heil myself?
Do you like my gloves?  They are made from Russians."

Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, Progressives, Liberals deciding who 'deserves' to live and who 'ought to' die?  And paying for these decisions with my / our tax dollars? 

Not just 'NO'. 

Oh, Heil No...