Sunday, January 16, 2011

A HealthCare Suggestion

In the US of A  the Republican Party is hell-bent to repeal the "Obama Health Care" program asap. . . .. Well, if they want to even appear credible, let those self-aggrandizing hypocrites first repeal their own very exclusive health care program. . . and join the rest of the Country. . . .lol

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/health_care_hypocrites/?r=6616&id=14779-2388044-6KWuukx

17 comments:

J said...

Be careful, Justin. The Advocate reported last week that one third of gay voters voted Republican in the November election.
You don't have to be a conservative to believe that Obamacare is a complete abortion that will not decrease the cost of health care delivery. Hasn't the Massachusetts healthcare plan enacted in Republican Mitt Romney's administration proof of this? In order to get Obamacare through Congress our parliament of whores permitted lobbyists for every major constituency to write amendments into the law to be sure their financial oxen weren't gored. Even the simplest reform, to require that insurers compete in a national market rather than in 50 separate state markets, thereby assuring that there is real competition for the customer's business, was never seriously considered by the Congress.
Believe me, Republicans who were elected last November know that if they don't produce before the 2012 elections they will be out on their ears. The public wants the spending and bogus reforms to come to an end, because it finally understands that this country is bankrupt.

JustinO'Shea said...

THANKS, J. . .excellent commentary, thought provoking. . . I think you ought to write more along these lines, explaining the antics of the Madams and their Pimps.

Thanks. . .

justin

Gary Kelly said...

And don't you dare all move to Australia. We've got enough problems as it is.

Coop said...

I agree, J, that "Obamacare" was not the right way to fix healthcare.
I wonder if the Republicans Realize that 1/3 of Gay people voted for them. Their official party line is to treat us as second rate citizens.

The more I know the less I like the idea of having two political parties dominate everything.

J said...

Treating gays as second class citizens is a trait not confined to Republicans, Coop. It is is characteristic of society as a whole. At the time of the Stonewall Riots of 1969 the vast majority of Americans believed that all homosexual acts should be prosecuted as felonies. That we have come as far as we have in 40 years is a civil rights victory of epic proportions, and it was accomplished largely "under the radar". Lawrence v Texas, the 2003 US Supreme Court decision that struck the ban on private consensual sodomy, is in my judgment nearly as significant a civil rights decision as Brown v Board of Education. We should note that three of the six justices voting in the majority were Republican appointees.

Jim said...

Decrease the costs of healthcare delivery? That is an impossible and crazy idea....healthcare ought to be, along with education, the number 1 priority of any government. The delivery of that system is going to be expensive...as it should be if what you want is dependable, professional care. Who should be benefiting from good health care, we the people or insurance companies? From my vantage point I feel Obama had a plan that was thwarted by the greed and self-interests of a few who happen to hold a lot of power and would have so much to lose if he got his way. He was stopped in his tracks by a huge monolith of which he will never recover.
I agree the 2 party system has its drawbacks. A third party would at least offer a distraction for a while...at least long enough for the other two parties to figure out how to get their heads out of their asses!!

Coop said...

J, I used to vote Republican. The party is being controlled by the bible belt bigots. I couldn't take the b.s. anymore.

Obama, Pelosi, et al. rammed the healthcare bill through. They even wore down some Democrats who had reservations. They wouldn't take other input. Few people liberal or conservative seem to remember that.

Gary Kelly said...

While America and Australia have much in common culturally and historically, there must be a huge difference somewhere along the line. National health works well in Oz. As I've said before, I went through the whole heart attack routine - air ambulance, specialist treatment in Sydney, etc - and it didn't cost me a penny. Even the train trip back home was free.

Also, the two major political parties here are pro-gay or at the very least non-discriminatory. We have prominent gay politicans here whose sexuality doesn't even raise an eyebrow.

So, can someone please explain to me why things that work in Oz don't work in the USA?

JustinO'Shea said...

Yeah but. . .. Gary, you guys are all upside down. . . .well, we up North have it all up straight. . yep. . . .and all messed up.

J said...

I agree, Coop, that religious fundamentalism is the curse of the Republican Party. Last summer I attended a Republican convention that had been taken over by the Tea Party. The majority of Tea Party people want to avoid the religious right agenda and stick to the traditional Republican objectives of maintaining low taxes, shrinking the government and cutting the deficit. I subscribe to that agenda. But christian fundamentalists are doing everything they can to piggyback their causes onto the Tea Party platform, and I saw that in action. A county delegation sitting in front of me typified this. The men and their wives were all delegates, and they brought their numerous children with them, complete with Bible-based home school reading materials and peanut butter sandwiches. Their leader looked like the farmer in Grant Wood's American Gothic, and they were prepared to pitchfork anyone who didn't believe the world was made in six days. I told the friend sitting next to me that I had nothing in common with that delegation, and the day people like that drive the educated, high minded people out of the Republican Party is the day I leave. What is the alternative? Libertarianism is the most intellectually satisfying political philosophy, but like most it has to be flexible in practice to succeed.

Gary Kelly said...

I was gonna have peanut butter on my toast this morning but I've changed my mind.

JustinO'Shea said...

Gary, thanks for sharing about your peanut butter. Such a meaningful echange!

Ijust flossed my teeth. ;-)

JustinO'Shea said...

Sheeeesssshhhhh.!!!

Are we slipping into Twitter-ese? Or the high caliber communications of FaceBook where we do not have an unreported twitch? Twinkish-ness slipping into BLOGarama?

Oy vey, Hazel!

I feel confident that Gary must have some sort of inner or hidden meaning in that reporting about not eating peanut butter. .must be something totally utterly a significantly awesome event. . .

Don't you feel...huh? huh? huh?

o'shea

Gary Kelly said...

I was waiting for someone else to come to my rescue, but it appears I'll have to come to my own.

My comment was a response to something J wrote...

A county delegation sitting in front of me typified this. The men and their wives were all delegates, and they brought their numerous children with them, complete with Bible-based home school reading materials and peanut butter sandwiches.

Coop said...

Babes, maybe Gary is saying something about political parties? Allegory, maybe? ;-)

JustinO'Shea said...

See what happened when the faithful are left to speculate. . .. hehe

Makes sense, I guess. You know you don't have to hold a baible when you eat peanut butter sangwiches. . . ;-)

Coop said...

Ah :) Thanks Gary. I forgot the small details of J's story.

Why bother with peanut butter if one can just have a handful of peanuts?