The biggest justification in favor of communism these days seems to be "rising health care costs". Well, Bad Commie knows how to control costs. BY STABBING COMMIES. Incidentally, that's also how you control commies.

In general, most doctors are sheep who don't give a shit about your health. As a simple example - take the case of prescribing "cover your ass" medication - If a doctor gave a shit about you and your wallet - he would tell you to get the drugs from Canada for half the price. They don't give a shit about you or your health. They just want to avoid getting sued by democratic trial lawyers.

Another example:

"I measured his vitamin D level and it was basically zero," he said. "His chest and low back pain were not due to cardiac or spinal disease but to low vitamin D. We put him on prescription strength vitamin D and he got much better. We had spent over $200,000 on him in the hospital for these other procedures without doing a $20 blood test."

Another way in which doctors don't give a shit about you is because they are ego driven maniacs who refuse to put in place accurate diagnosis systems. With the advent of computers, each patient should have to answer about 50 computer questions in the waiting room to accurately diagnose his problem ten times better than a commie doctor. Most doctors do not listen and just ask one or two questions. Some doctors are working to change this. A good example is Problem Knowledge Couplers. Just the implementation of this one thing would cut health care costs in HALF, stop the asshole doctors from ripping us off, and DOUBLE the quality of our health care and even ELIMINATE DOCTORS FROM THE LOOP making the individual responsible for his or her health.

So if a mass murdering commie says you should give him all your money because you need health care - KICK that fucker in the balls and then stab him.

Commies don't give a shit about your health just like they don't care about your education or about your being oppressed due to your being stupid.


OK, now on to less serious things like religion. I just saw the movie "The Passion of the Christ" today. Before I get into my review, I would like to provide some choice excerpts from this article by a TEXAN LAWYER (All good things come from Texas) in IntellectualConservative.com:

I believe, a movie that can be that it can be enjoyed by Christians and non-Christians alike, although the graphic depiction of torture and execution may be somewhat tougher to take if one doesn't have a spiritual context in which to place it (un-anchored from the religious,I suppose some could view it as almost a snuff flick, albeit an incredibly stunning one, visually and in terms of performance).
...
This is artistic license in favor of the Jews, the Scriptures clearly state that the "whole Sanhedrin" was present for the trial. So, right from the beginning, Gibson destroys the charge that he is portraying "the Jews" as a monolithic group of bloodthirsty monsters out to get Jesus. Instead, what he shows is that this whole proceeding was intentionally hidden from "the Jews" by a small, power-hungry and unscrupulous group of Jews who likely recognize that the larger population of Jerusalem will not stand for such a miscarriage of justice.

It is this same group of Pharisees and Sadducees, along with their handpicked "flash mob", that make their way to the Praetorium for the hearing before Pilate. Thus, in Gibson's depiction, the "bloodthirsty crowd" is not representative of the Jewish population of Jerusalem but is, in fact, shown to be a group formed and manipulated for an express purpose by a few people. If anything, it goes a long way toward showing that the rest of the population could not be guilty of complicity in the condemnation of Jesus because this was meant to be hidden from them until Pilate had issued a death sentence, after which the populace would just assume that judgment had been rendered by the Romans alone. This is nuanced.
...
There is, overall, not a hint of the antagonism towards Jews qua Jews that the ADL and other commentators have alleged. And, after reading all of the movie reviews, I see even more clearly what I have long suspected: the agenda of the intelligentsia is to employ indirect fire against the substance of the film (i.e., the Gospels themselves), although so-called critics are using all sorts of weapons to attack it: "it's too violent"; "it doesn't tell the whole story", etc. What they ignore, of course, is that Mel Gibson didn't make a movie called "The Life of Jesus" or "Reflections on Jesus' Message". He assumes that people are familiar with the story; what he is trying to drive home is that the central theme of the story -- Jesus' sacrifice -- was exceedingly difficult and exceedingly painful. He's trying to convey a sense of the magnitude of this suffering and, hence, the magnitude of the act itself, undertaken willingly. In this he succeeds magnificently.
...
There is a manifest failure on a part of a large portion of the chattering class to understand that this image of a brutalized Christ suffering for us is the central theme of Christianity, not some mere sideshow with which Mel Gibson, in his grubby lust for violence, is obsessed.
...
Secularism is, in fact, a religion, a self-referential and narcissistic religion in which you shall have no other gods before self (see Romans 1:29-57). Remember this when you are told, "don't impose your beliefs on me!"

Well, this guy is exactly right - the movie is very pro-Semitic.

However, in the Bible (in real life?), the Jews DID kill Christ. Mel Gibson goes out of his way to make that as painless and guilt free as possible. And the Pussy Pope even agreed with him. Well, I think that was an error. The Bible isn't about people being basically nice. It's about people being EVIL and causing Christ to suffer. People don't do EVIL things because they are GOOD. They do them because they are EVIL. To deny that basic fact is sheer idiocy and denial of basic human nature to boot.

Of-Course the Bible was most likely a plot by its authors (Romans) to keep the excitable Middle Easterners (Jews, Palestinians, Iraqis, etc) under control. The Middle Easterners were all equally excitable and prone to following prophets. So the Romans needed some sort of tool to make them more easily controllable. It seems probable that one of the Roman Emperors got tired of the nightshirts rebelling all the time and running around and getting excited. So he came up with a really good way to keep them under control. And it worked! It kept them under control so much that they were unable to break free from religion and follow the light of science forward to progress. Roman religion is still oppressing them. I think its clear that middle easterners are ALL Jews. They ALL killed Christ just like they all still kill most of their religious figures, even today. Killing Christ was no big deal - the people of the time killed the local Christ like every day. The big invention of the Romans was in creating a fake passion play where the middle easterners killed Christ SO GOOD that they didn't need to kill him again. Mel Gibson would have made an excellent Roman. Of-Course, all Christs are Commies and deserve to die. Send Commie Christs back to God where they belong!


And I'd like to finish today with how to maintain your liberty - FROM COMMIES.

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

3. Glock: The original point and click interface.

4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.

5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

8. If you don't know your rights you don't have any.

9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights reserved.

11. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

12. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday. Imagine that! Not even one!

14. Guns only have two enemies: rust and liberals.

15. Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety.

16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

17. 911 - government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.

18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

19. Criminals love gun control -- it makes their jobs safer.

20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.

21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

22. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.

23. Enforce the "gun control laws" we have, don't make more.

24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

26. "...A government of the people, by the people, for the people..."

-posted by Bad Commie @ 5:21 PM