This topic has been moved by the moderator of this forum.
It can be found at:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

I've been heartened and encouraged by the tone of several recent posts here and the comments they've elicited. Most of us, I'm starting to believe (or hope), have very similar views when it comes to firearms and all the related social, constitutional, legal and political issues.


Sure, there are extremists on both sides who make a lot of noise here (and wouldn't this be a duller place without 'em!), but I'm convinced they make up a tiny percentage of the gun owners in this forum as they do in the country at large. But their ability to influence the quality of discourse is often way out of proportion to their numbers. Insults and fear-mongering are the tools they use, and by adopting their tactics we give them a legitimacy they do not deserve. They are the only grabbers. They are the only nuts.


As a gun owner, I'm not sure which epithet I find more insulting and inaccurate - "Nut" or "Grabber". Sorry, Folks, but I AM NEITHER! Does owning several firearms make me a "Nut"? Some on the fringe would insist, "YES!" Like the overwhelming majority here (I'd wager), I would much prefer to be labeled (if labeling is your thing) a
GUN ENTHUSIAST.
And I don't want to "grab" anyone's guns, and I don't want anyone to "grab" mine, either. But I also don't get all bent out of shape when new laws (even stupid and ineffective ones), threatening to limit my purchasing choices, are proposed. Does this make me a "Grabber"? Some on the fringe would also insist, "YES!" I haven't come up with an accurate, catchy label to describe what I see as a reasonable, level-headed stance on the issue. And again, I'd wager my views reflect those of the majority.

So let's reserve the name-calling for those wingers who truly are worthy.


And thus ends my

In September, 2008, George Bush gave a prime-time televised speech to pitch his financial bailout package to Congress and the American people. It worked. In a matter of mere months Congress approved, and the President signed, a bill allocating hundreds of billions of dollars to be given to banks and other financial institutions.
I found the text of that remarkably effective speech, and by substituting a few words and adding a few sentences I think I may have hit upon something. Imagine President Obama going prime-time with this:

"Good evening. This is an extraordinary period for America.

Over the past few weeks, many Americans have felt anxiety about their health and their future. I understand their worry and their frustration. Nearly 50 million Americans have no health insurance. Many more find themselves at the mercy of the Insurance and Pharmaceutical Companies, who are more concerned with profit than with providing quality care.

We're in the midst of a serious health care crisis, and the federal government is responding with decisive action.

I'm a strong believer in free enterprise, so my natural instinct is to oppose government intervention.

Under normal circumstances, I would have followed this course. But these are not normal circumstances. Our current health care system is not functioning properly. There has been a widespread loss of confidence.

The government's top health and economic experts warn that, without immediate action by Congress, thousands of Americans will die prematurely. Thousands more will be forced into bankruptcy.

I know that a health care reform package will present a tough vote for many members of Congress. It is difficult to pass a bill that commits so much of the taxpayers' hard-earned money. However, I can assure you that a universal, single-payer health care system, like the one proposed in House Resolution 676 (Medicare For All), will actually cost LESS than the inefficient system currently in place. How will it work? Well, back in 1948, when Great Britain enacted universal health care, they sent out a pamphlet to all British citizens. It stated:


'Your new National Health Service (NHS) begins on July 5th. It will provide you with all medical, dental and nursing care. Everyone, rich or poor, man, woman or child could use it or any part of it. There are no charges except for a few special items. There are no insurer qualifications, but it is not a charity. You're paying for it mainly as taxpayers and it will relieve your money worries in times of illness.'


Pretty straight forward, and a good place for us to start. I promise you this - All decisions concerning your health care will be made solely by you and your doctor. The government will not have the power to deny or restrict any treatment options. No one will be refused coverage due to pre-existing conditions. You will be able to choose any doctor or hospital you wish.

I know that Americans sometimes get discouraged by the tone in Washington and the seemingly endless partisan struggles, yet history has shown that, in times of real trial, elected officials rise to the occasion.

And together we will show the world once again what kind of country America is: a nation that tackles problems head on, where leaders come together to meet great tests, and where people of every background can work hard, develop their talents, and realize their dreams.

Thank you for listening. May God bless you."