Fight the Tea Party | TheLedger.com "With little more than a year before the 2012 presidential election, right-wing extremists are waging war nationally and state by state upon the middle class and poor. We see this played out everyday on the news. Working people are losing rights, while the wealthy hoard all the money at the top, and conservatives support them for some insane reason. Why do tea partiers, who are primarily working-class people and seniors, support something that works against themselves? Can they really be that ignorant? The wealthy Koch brothers funded the tea party and through Fox News have persuaded them that President Barack Obama is a bad man, government of any kind is bad and all government programs must be dismantled. Tea partiers and the religious right played right into their hands. Their aim is to take over the country at the expense of the middle class and poor. They have bought Congress to do their bidding. If they have their way, the middle class will be reduced to poverty with no means to fight. Those who supported the war waged on us will finally see how they have been used, and it will be too late. Oh, the outrage! People, wake up from your drug-induced coma. With only a 27 percent approval rating, it appears at least some who voted for Rick Scott here in Florida now see the truth of what is happening. If people want to change the situation, they should consider contacting their local Democratic Party officials and get involved. We must fight for our rights. DEBRA STRICKLAND Polk City"
well.. congress has a low approval rating.. which means we will get rid of them and bring in a whole new lot of politicians with a different letter next to their name. now.. how will that help the country?
The people that we bring in that have a different letter next to their name would be more willing to compromise and agree with each other rather than blocking the whole time. Thus allowing helpful legislation to pass.
but we just had a bunch of people w/ the same letter.. they even had the same letter as the president.. and they had a shit approval rating too, and passed no helpful legislation at all..
They did spend $5.2 TRILLION though... They compromised...we got both unlimited warfare AND welfare. Lucky us!
I for one think that healthcare reform was helpful legislation. I'm going to make a wild guess and say that you did not think it was helpful at all. That's okay, that's your opinion, your entitled to it.
...and here I thought the Tea Party were the ones supporting corporatism. Do you work for an insurance company or something?
why do you laugh at me because i have a different opinion as you on the healthcare bill? you call it healthcare reform.. how was the healthcare industry reformed?
I'd love for someone to explain what was good about the healthcare 'reform'. So far I have seen a lot of people say how good it is without saying why. For one thing why is it good for the Government to be able to mandate that we buy something we may or may not want? I happen to want health insurance so I buy it. If someone wants to forgo it that should be their right. They also shouldn't expect people to then foot the bill for them if they can't afford to pay out of pocket when they need it.
So if lost your job and you broken your leg and could not afford to get a cast, your just going to suffer till you get a job, save up your money, and pay for it? I hope you can get a desk job Medical care is more than just pills you know. I would prefer if healthcare focused more on prevention than treatment, but some things like breaking bones aren't always preventable.
Nope, I'd go to the ER, get it set, and pay it off over time. By law they cannot refuse anyone emergency care. Nice try though. When did I say anything about it being just about pills? You're debating skills are quite lacking, no offense. Try to actually comprehend what someone is saying before you go off base with your reply Are you SURE you're smoking weed and not crack?
There is some good in the healthcare bill. All the good has already taken effect. 2014 I believe is when the benefits for big Pharma, and Insurance company's take effect. Read the bill for yourself, its not good for we the people. The changes that have taken affect such as no denial for a child for a preexisting condition and kids can stay on parents insurance until age 26 are good things. Really they only need to pass some laws saying "No preexisting condition denial" not make a mandate. AND IF THE COVERAGE IS SO GOOD THEN WHY DOESN'T"T CONGRESS USE IT AND OR MANDATE IT ON THEMSELVES? To answer your question, no only a moron is going to break their leg and sit around and do nothing about it. Thats why hospitals have this thing called the EMERGENCY ROOM. If you don't have insurance you just have to wait like 4-6 hours to see the poor mans doctor but at least you will get fixed up and sent hm with a bill that you can pay or not pay if you don't have the funds. You will get the bone set and a cast for free. No pain killers though, big Pharma ain't giving those things out. At least in CA thats how it works.
You say that people shouldn't expect for others to foot the bill for them if they can't afford to pay out of pocket when they need it. Yet, you would let people foot the bill when you need it? "Uninsured people who are injured go to emergency rooms, which are required by law to treat them regardless of financial means to pay for the treatment. More subtly, uninsured people take more sick days, reducing overall production and increasing costs of all goods for everyone." "Uninsured people are more likely to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills than people who have health insurance. The costs incurred in medical bills that are bankrupted do not vanish; instead, they are added to everyone else's medical bill as a sort of "cost of doing business" expense. In other words, if George down the street declares bankruptcy because he can't pay for the surgery on his leg, you pay for part of that surgery." How Do Taxpayers Pay for the Uninsured? | eHow.com
Which part of 'paying it off' didn't make sense to you? You really aren't reading what I'm saying, or if you are you're failing to comprehend it.
Which part of "others still have to pay for it" didn't make sense to you? You really aren't reading what I'm saying, or if you are you're failing to comprehend it.
OSG asks a direct question, you dodge it and throw a red herring. You then continue to misrepresent OSG's position(s) and conclude by mimicking him. How... underwhelming.