Syndicated writer Argus Hamilton rarely misses an opportunity to produce a chuckle at the expense of any politician. He clearly considers any words or actions out of Washington to be a fair target for his humor. Like all good comedy, Hamilton's words contain a grain of truth.

These two quotes from him as published in the Jewish World Review are good examples. Both concern money. "The Senate Finance Committee voted down a public option in the health care reform bill on Tuesday. The current bill forces everyone to buy health insurance or face a fine or jail. If it passes, millions of Americans will renounce their citizenship and stay in America illegally so they can get free health care in the emergency room.

"Senator Jay Rockefeller called insurance companies bandits Tuesday for making profits. He's the great-grandson of the founder of Standard Oil. Psychologists say this is what happens when you hate your parents but don't want to give back the money."

An old saw says if you want to know why something happened, just follow the money. Too often that is the key to our government's actions. But the money with which to be concerned in Washington are the dollars that empower those occupying the seats of power.
Simply put, too many of our politicians have little or no concern about the people who pay their way other than to keep us in control for the next vote.

Opinions of such runs the gamut from those to who would rather live in a world with little or no government to those who desire to live in a world where the government would supply their every want and need. Both are fantasy worlds, unrealistic to the core.

For reality demands we live somewhere between those extremes. For the first would be anarchy, a world of feudal chaos, and the second would produce a totalitarian society ruled by an elite class keeping all others enslaved. Too many folks clamoring for a bigger and bigger role for government have no realization that they would be in the later category.

Hamilton's first quote touches on the government's seeming concern for the will of the people in voting down a government run health care option. But that concern is exposed as false by the substitute offered in place of that option - health care co-operatives. That begs this question; what are the differences in the long run between government run health care and health care by co-operatives controlled by government? Absolutely none.

Any health care system, from the best to the worst, could be improved. The question is how.
Following the money in this case shows that many in Washington care nothing about the detrimental effects their proposals would have on the lifestyles of ordinary Americans.
Witness a Towers Perrin Survey of Human Resource Executives that shows if it is passed as proposed 87 percent of employers would reduce workers' benefits; 30 percent would lay off or fire workers and 27 percent would reduce salaries.

Also being ignored is a Rasmussen Reports poll showing that 68 percent of American voters have health insurance they rate as good or excellent.
And conveniently overlooked is the federal law that requires health care facilities and personnel to treat every sick or injured person regardless of their ability to pay.
So why destroy the building just to add a room?
Because the true goal of the current rush appears not to be better health care but a conversion of America to the second fantasy world above.

taylormadetalk@yahoo.com