Wow! This is so insightful. I thought he would need to be charged with terrorism... The tv documentary goes at length about whether it was terrorism that motivated his actions. Most of the experts agreed it was.
Even though these special elections have been in deep red districts I still find it shocking that voters apparently want their Healthcare taken away from them.
House Republicans voted for the "Wealthcare" bill that will take away healthcare from more than 20 million people and give tax cuts to people who are extremely wealthy.
These voters be like, "Yes please and be sure to cut education, social security, kill net neutrality, sell my search history, and slap me in the face while you are at it. Also if you could just light the countryside on fire and pour toxic waste in our rivers that's be great."
They see Trump's budget and are like yeah we need more of this and another 300 million dollar bonus for big oil CEOs by God!
Are people that clueless? Is gerrymandering this bad or is voter suppression this effective? I don't get it.
Republicans don't really believe in governing, but they are a very good opposition party, and great at winning elections. However, once they attain power, and no longer have the foil of Democrats being in charge, they will, til the end of time, start running against the "culture" of the country. The War on Christmas, Shakespeare in the Park, Beyonce doing a tribute to the Black Panthers at the Super Bowl ad infinitum. Basically, they will convince their voters that anything more progressive than "Leave it to Beaver" in popular culture is what is REALLY destroying the country.
True. You can't shout down somebody during their speech or performance, but you can pressure the hosts, before the event, to cancel it.
Or at least, the First Amendment will protect the latter but not the former.
You can also protest during an event.
I'm not sure the anti-heckling thing is all that clear cut so I'm not going to comment on it.
You can, but if others are trying to listen to the speaker and get irritated they're allowed to shout down the shout downer as well. How long before that degenerates into a fist fight? Who's at fault in that case?
True. You can't shout down somebody during their speech or performance, but you can pressure the hosts, before the event, to cancel it.
Or at least, the First Amendment will protect the latter but not the former.
You can also protest during an event.
I'm not sure the anti-heckling thing is all that clear cut so I'm not going to comment on it.
You can, but if others are trying to listen to the speaker and get irritated they're allowed to shout down the shout downer as well. How long before that degenerates into a fist fight? Who's at fault in that case?
Well, in most cases, private security would escort them out. If you were at a Trump rally, you'd likely get assaulted. Hell, people got assaulted at Trump rallies for holding signs in their lap in complete silence and for wearing t-shirts with slogans on them.
Compare it to a late campaign rally Obama was holding for Hillary, when a Trump suppporter interrupted the proceeding. The crowd started to boo, and Obama stopped them and said that a.) he was elderly, and we should respect our elders and that b.) it appeared he was a veteran and had earned the right to speak his mind. Go watch it, it's on video. That is what the leader of the Democratic Party did in a tense protest situation. Trump, in similar situations, said to "knock the hell out of them." Pretty telling. Something that seems to have been lost down the memory hole is that, over the spring and summer, Trump was actively encouraging violence at his rallies from the podium on a weekly if not daily basis. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the major "draw" of Trump rallies during a certain portion of the campaign was the chance that you might see physical violence against a liberal protester.
@BelleSorciere: The idea is that you can protest, but you can't drown out the speaker's voice, because that doesn't offer an alternate point of view; you'd be actively silencing somebody through a kind of force. So you could go to an event and carry signs and talk to people, but being so loud that the speaker couldn't speak would not be protected.
Expressing an opinion doesn't amount to the use of force, but speech is sound, and if you crank it up loud enough, sound can actually cause physical damage (the military has actually made sonic weapons). That's the kind of situation in which loud speech is equal to coercive force.
@BelleSorciere: The idea is that you can protest, but you can't drown out the speaker's voice, because that doesn't offer an alternate point of view; you'd be actively silencing somebody through a kind of force. So you could go to an event and carry signs and talk to people, but being so loud that the speaker couldn't speak would not be protected.
Expressing an opinion doesn't amount to the use of force, but speech is sound, and if you crank it up loud enough, sound can actually cause physical damage (the military has actually made sonic weapons). That's the kind of situation in which loud speech is equal to coercive force.
Well sure, but do we have situations where someone has brought in some supersonic noise machine to drown out someone who is speaking?? I mean, I would doubt that anything has risen above the level of the kind of noisemakers you hear at sporting events, if that.
@jjstraka34, come on. I'm not saying the "heckler's veto" concept is about futuristic sonic weapons. That's silly! The sonic weapon thing was just an extreme example to point out that speech has a physical aspect to it, in the form of sound.
To use a more normal example: by shouting loudly and repeatedly, a single person can prevent another single person from being heard or understood, and a group of people can completely drown out another person's voice. That's the heckler's veto: using one's voice to prevent another person from expressing their opinion.
@jjstraka34, come on. I'm not saying the "heckler's veto" concept is about futuristic sonic weapons. That's silly! The sonic weapon thing was just an extreme example to point out that speech has a physical aspect to it, in the form of sound.
To use a more normal example: by shouting loudly and repeatedly, a single person can prevent another single person from being heard or understood, and a group of people can completely drown out another person's voice. That's the heckler's veto: using one's voice to prevent another person from expressing their opinion.
I just thought it was an out of the blue example is all.
Speaking of science fiction, Trump is in Iowa holding a rally tonight, still insisting that not only is Mexico going to pay for the wall, but that the wall will have SOLAR PANELS all along it that will generate revenue for the US. Ok then. So Republicans don't believe in climate change, support leaving the Paris climate deal, but they are all for a solar-powered wall on the Mexican border now that Trump says so. Mark it down. Mexico is paying for a solar panel border wall. Anyone got an extra $1000 lying around that says this never gets done?? Shit, why don't we builld a "coal wall" to create more coal jobs?? Or, as someone suggested on Twitter, maybe in addition to solar panels, we line the entire Mexican side with mirrors, so that potential wall jumpers are blinded by the sun's rays bouncing back into their eyes. Naturally, we will also need a wall-length mote on our end filled with sharks with laser beams attached to their heads as a bulwark against the truly determined. Possibly a 10 mile no-man's land beyond that filled with landmines to deter those who are exceptionally good swimmers.
He also said there should be a law that immigrants who enter the US shouldn't be eligible for welfare benefits for 5 years. So I guess it's a good thing there already IS a law that mandates EXACTLY that that has been on the books for, oh, you know, 21 YEARS.
Well la de da. Now that your boy is in the White House you decided to be done with the politics of hate. hahahahaha whatever dude. If Hillary was President and a Democrat got shot playing baseball would you be out there calling for us all to unite? Feck no he wouldn't. He didn't say boo before about hate crimes and he himself was calling for Obama to be lynched and Hillary to be shot etc etc etc.
Same with Kellyanne Conjob. A couple days ago she was saying we should all unite and tone down or whatever and then they barely win some ruby red gerrymandered special elections and she's being really classy.
Where's the civil political discourse you supposedly have been clamoring for?
And I'm shocked Trump restrained himself for a couple hours - the tweets yesterday were congratulations which were fine but then of course this morning he's back to gloating and attacking just as he did at his rally in front of Trumpists. He's too afraid to go in front of the public he'll only appear on Faux News and in front of low information crowds that would cheer him if he shot someone on fifth avenue or whatever like he said.
So no don't be shocked but Trump, Kellyanne, Mitch, Nugent and the rest of them don't want civil politics. And more shocking news is the sky is still blue!
EDIT: Do you think Donald Trump is right he said that he has been reaching out for Democratic votes for his healthcare plan and blasted Senate Democrats for obstructing his healthcare plan that none of them have seen since it's being made in secret. Just another misleading lie by the good old Prez.
The Senate health bill is a moral abomination, which is basically phasing out Medicaid over a longer period of time, but with even larger cuts, simply to fall outisde the box of the CBO score. Lifetime caps?? Back. Pre-existing conditions?? Back. This bill will kill people, thousands of them. As I type this, disabled protesters in wheelchairs are being escorted away from Mitch McConnell's office. What a bunch of evil, heartless bastards.
Message to any future Democratic campaign: you run the video of that taking place, and then you tie the Republican running against you to it and blame them for it. You tie it around their ankles like a millstone. You tell the voters in your district that Republicans would as soon see the poor and disabled rot and die so they can fund a tax-break. You don't stay civil, you don't act nice and call for deficit reduction and bipartisan agreement. You shiv them. For christ sake, hit back, and hit back hard. Show some balls.
Isn't this the doomsday bunker conspiracy conservatives fears come to life? Secret government bills ramrodded through Congress infringing on your liberty and all that?
And a secret government refusing to appear in front of anyone that might ask questions? But let me guess, it's ok because it's Republicans right.
Supposedly a couple of Republican Senators are hold outs but don't hold your breath, they are holding out for some donations. Sure they'll appear on camera for some publicity as the guy who stood up against this terrible bill and say golly I don't know about this, then they'll pass it anyway.
A couple more hundred thousand dollar campaign donations and they'll come around and pass it. That's what they're waiting for. And those donations are drops in the bucket for the guys these ultra wealthy Republican donors. A couple hundred thousand dollars is nothing compared to how much they'll save in taxes on their vast fortunes.
A key takeaway from the AHCA Senate bill is a rise in average deductibles from $2500 to $4100. That is $1600 dollars more in out of pocket expenses before your insurance covers a dime.
Let me break this down for you, this bill effects two groups of people. Millionaires who will save roughly 4% on income over $250,000, and people who have at least one loved one who relies on Medicaid who will be hurt. If you are reading this, I can guarantee you are in the later category rather than the former. This is a bill designed to make the poor and needy suffer to fund a tax break for people who will likely consider it a rounding error.
There are almost certainly people on this forum who are on Medicaid, and I kind of question phrasing one of the groups as "people who have at least one loved one who relies on Medicaid" rather than "people who are on Medicaid."
There are almost certainly people on this forum who are on Medicaid, and I kind of question phrasing one of the groups as "people who have at least one loved one who relies on Medicaid" rather than "people who are on Medicaid."
Well, I was just trying to broaden the spectrum of empathy, but I take your point.
There were reports that Trump had said the Senate bill was "mean". Well, he just tweeted his total support for it. As I said, he is a LIAR and even if he DID think it was mean, that doesn't matter nearly as much to him as putting a W on the board. And let me be crystal clear. Donald Trump, unlike nearly every other Republican in the primary, said, on COUNTLESS occasions, that he would not touch Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. And these bills GUT Medicaid. The House bill guts it sooner and slightly less, the Senate bill guts it more and slightly later, but they will be a death-blow to the system.
I'll bring this up again, because it's something that will resonate if this happens. Medicaid pays for 60% of people in nursing homes. And even white, suburban Republicans who make $100,000/year who think they are immune and apart from those who "leech" off their tax dollars are going to feel it when they either have to start shelling out thousands of dollars a month to pay to keep mom in a nursing home, or they have to renovate their guest room to make it a suitable living space for an ailing senior citizen. Many of these people have very little empathy for anyone ELSE this hurts, but they will get indignant damn quick if it touches them.
There are almost certainly people on this forum who are on Medicaid, and I kind of question phrasing one of the groups as "people who have at least one loved one who relies on Medicaid" rather than "people who are on Medicaid."
Well, I was just trying to broaden the spectrum of empathy, but I take your point.
I am sorry that I was overly harsh. Just being on Medicaid myself I am pretty tense about the topic.
There are almost certainly people on this forum who are on Medicaid, and I kind of question phrasing one of the groups as "people who have at least one loved one who relies on Medicaid" rather than "people who are on Medicaid."
Well, I was just trying to broaden the spectrum of empathy, but I take your point.
I am sorry that I was overly harsh. Just being on Medicaid myself I am pretty tense about the topic.
I hope we can stop this somehow, but I would never underestimate Mitch McConnell's ability to pull off something this dastardly. I have never seen a piece of legislation that is just so heartless and indifferent to human suffering.
Indeed. Stopping it seems like a distant hope but I'm definitely trying to put my energy in that direction.
We're getting some momentum - last week the democrats were apparently thinking of not fighting at all, and now they're starting to get some backbone. But...we'll see.
We won't be safe until the current crop of republicans are out of office. The most useless democrats have to go too, if you won't fight or you are part of the problem you gotta go.
No matter what we do (we being the reasonable people who are not receiving bribes from the wealthy) the political liars will spin it. And people are going to be hurting and Republicans will continue playing games to get their donors tax breaks until they are not paying taxes. Even then they wouldn't represent us, they'd want their owners to earn salary in taxes. They gotta go out of office, vote em out.
We need medicare for all. And we should be investing in real education to pump out more quality doctors and scientists and solving real problems. Math and science, lets lead the world again in those areas instead of cutting and dumbing everything down so we have clueless consumers supporting kingly lifestyles for the rich.
We won't be safe until the current crop of republicans are out of office. The most useless democrats have to go too, if you won't fight or you are part of the problem you gotta go.
No matter what we do (we being the reasonable people who are not receiving bribes from the wealthy) the political liars will spin it. And people are going to be hurting and Republicans will continue playing games to get their donors tax breaks until they are not paying taxes. Even then they wouldn't represent us, they'd want their owners to earn salary in taxes. They gotta go out of office, vote em out.
We need medicare for all. And we should be investing in real education to pump out more quality doctors and scientists and solving real problems. Math and science, lets lead the world again in those areas instead of cutting and dumbing everything down so we have clueless consumers supporting kingly lifestyles for the rich.
Yes, we need Medicare for all. But show me how we get that done. The ACA was watered down, a conservative plan in reality (was Romneycare before it was Obamcare), but it was ALL that could pass both chambers of Congress and do SOMETHING to try and get most people insured. And again, outside of the coverage situation, it ELIMINATED the predatory practices of pre-existing conditions and lifetime limits, both of which allow your insurance company to extort or kill you at their whim. If for no other reasons, those provisions made the bill worthwhile, and, unsurprisingly, once you remove Obama and the political cudgel Republicans made of the bill back then and in the subsequent years, major portions of it are very, very popular. We shouldn't even have such a thing as health insurance companies, but since we DO, the ACA was a first step at working around them to attempt to help people.
And then you have this.....atrocity that the Republicans are attempting to pass. I mean, it is really hard to wrap you head around a bill that's primary function is to kick 20+ million people off coverage, raise deductibles, eliminates essential benefits, brings BACK pre-existing conditions and lifetime limits, and take a chainsaw to Medicaid, which is the backbone of support for those with disabilities, rural hospitals, nursing homes, those who require in-home care etc etc etc. I mean, I saw a poll today that showed it polling at 16%. What the hell is in this thing that these 16% of people support?? Who is this for?? It's not a health care bill, it's simply step one in their tax cut plan. And, while some people will surely die because they don't have insurance, many more will still seek treatment. In emergency rooms. Which is the most ineffective (both financially and health-wise) way to treat someone. And the hospitals are not going to eat that loss. If 20+ million people who have insurance now DON'T in a few years, YOU are going to pay for it because the insurance companies will raise their rates to make-up for the astronomical costs of people flooding emergency rooms.
I mean, this is one part sticking it to liberals and Obama and trying to erase his Presidency, one part giveaway to millionaires, and the rest is just a sociopathic lust to see poor people suffer. I've been saving things all day that I read to revisit and post about here, but I don't even know where to start, to be honest. But for now, I'll end with this, to conservatives: Yelling about how bad liberals are isn't going to pay your health care bills. It's not going to save you if your kid gets cancer and you hit your lifetime limit within 6 months and your insurance company, which doesn't give as shit about you, literally, pulls the plug on you. Most of these Medicaid cuts are going to hit deep red States, and god knows the problems I have with Trump voters, but for the love of god, I still want them to be able to have health insurance. Society cannot function in the Ayn Rand fantasy-land Republicans are trying to implement. The center will not hold.
Not to put a spotlight on anyone, but @BelleSorciere has said she relies on Medicaid. I know in the past @ThacoBell has mentioned that he falls outside the range of the subsidies, and may also have a child who has medical issues (though I don't remember for sure on that one, apologies if it's incorrect). So let's work to FIX that issue and continue to help those who receive Medicaid as well, and not support this cruel and heartless legislation. Because the issues affecting your fellow forumites may not apply to your life right now, but I can say with total certainty that one day they WILL, and you will need someone to have your back. The Republican health plan does not. For anyone.
medicare for all is the only answer. First, take back the House and Senate, we'll get a new President in 1308 days if he doesn't quit or get impeached or start a civil war or something ridiculous before then. It won't be all roses and honey then either the Republicans that are left will be awful and do everything and nothing to smear everything but once people have healthcare maybe just maybe most people won't believe their lies about healthcare.
Look we've been saying for months - hey this train's headed off a cliff. Yet people keep voting for these guys. The Republican plan is a much worse Obamacare. And people are going to die. Mitch McConnell,Trump, and the rest of them don't care. They're going to get their tax cuts for their donors.
I guess these Trump voters don't see the train headed off the tracks until it affects them. It's like those Trump voters who voted for Trump to kick out the illegal immigrants but didn't think that meant he would kick out their illegal immigrant wife or husband. You can only tell people hey you're making a huge mistake until you are blue in the face, they have to see it themselves. Sad.
Alright, as I said, I mostly saved personal stories I saw on Twitter over the course of the day, and here are the ones that resonated most with me. This isn't some abstract concept about free speech or gun rights, we are talking about whether people can continue to live their day to day lives with some modicum of dignity:
Bout as nice as I can get after seeing what parts of the (un) affordable health care act has done to premiums and drug prices over the last few years, and what the GOP secretive group may be going to do to poorer, older, and preexisting folks.
I am coming more strongly to the conclusion that the democratic process as used by the majority of POLITICIANS in power, all sides, is starting to fail more than ever.
This capitalistic profit based healthcare INDUSTRY (not system) in the US just can't seem to help itself but try and hold out as long as it can.
Too many folks holding on to positions and not the real interests for the mutual gain of all.
@jjstraka34 You are correct, my son as well as my wife have lifetime disabilities. My wife got lucky with it, but we don't even know what all the effects will be for my son as he grows.
Bout as nice as I can get after seeing what parts of the (un) affordable health care act has done to premiums and drug prices over the last few years, and what the GOP secretive group may be going to do to poorer, older, and preexisting folks.
I am coming more strongly to the conclusion that the democratic process as used by the majority of POLITICIANS in power, all sides, is starting to fail more than ever.
This capitalistic profit based healthcare INDUSTRY (not system) in the US just can't seem to help itself but try and hold out as long as it can.
Too many folks holding on to positions and not the real interests for the mutual gain of all.
Well, just for the sake of argument let me tell you a story about some of the reasons WHY those premiums went up in some of the state exchanges. The #1 reason is because many GOP Governors simply declined the Medicaid expansion, even though it wouldn't have cost their state a dime for a very long period of time if they had done so. It was a completely political move that cut the Act off at the heels, and the Supreme Court, while not throwing it out entirely, went along with this aspect of it. #2 is the poison pill Marco Rubio put into a spending bill in 2014. It had to do with "risk corridors". The ACA required that insurance companies provide coverage to sick people. Since we ARE left with a for-profit health insurance industry, they were given a window in which they would be compensated for high-risk patients by getting payments from the government to make up their losses, should they have them. Rubio's move denied these payments, and was set up with the express design of sending the exchanges into a tailspin for political purposes. Again, Republicans are easily cynical enough to know that the VAST majority of people would never find out or look into this, and simply blame the ACA wholesale, completely disregarding the two issues I'm making in this post. Because the devil is in the details, and most of the debate on healthcare was focused on surface noise. Aside from all this, premiums have been going up long before the ACA, and will continue to go up whether it survives or not.
So the problem is this: America has shown no willingness to move from it's for-profit model of healthcare, despite no other developed country having such a system, and indeed, the idea of any European country or Canada DOING AWAY with their national health-care is so far beyond the third-rail that even the most conservative politicians would never run on such a platform and be taken seriously. Taking into account that we are, for the moment, stuck in an immoral and insane way of providing healthcare, the ACA was a flawed but GENUINE ATTEMPT to get more people covered, and, again, do away with the heinous practices of pre-existing conditions, lifetime caps, and provide essential coverage. And the ONLY way to ensure the last 3 was to implement the individual mandate and work with our existing (and wholly immoral) system of insurance companies. Because there was not political will to do otherwise. But more importantly, there was no voter will to do so from the center or the right. If you thought the town halls of that summer were bad for what the ACA actually was, imagine if Obama had tried to just flat-out nationalize healthcare in one swoop. It would have never happened. I think that's what we need to do, but I also realize what country I am living in and what the political realities are.
You will find very few on the left who think the ACA is even CLOSE to perfect. It's got major problems, mostly because it didn't go nearly far enough for most of us. But I recognize that, for many people covered by it's 3 main tenants, it has saved lives. The testimonials of it are everywhere. Are rising premiums a problem, especially for those that fall outside being able to get help?? Absolutely, and good faith attempts need to be made to improve and fix those things. Social Security was a damn mess initially as well, foremost because it completely excluded African-Americans because of how it was implemented and what jobs African-Americans worked in at the time. But, at it's core, given the realities of how we deal with health-care, it was a sincere attempt to #1.) cover more people and #2.) completely do away with the most blatant predatory practices of the insurance industry we all hate. And it accomplished both goals. Premium rates not so much. That part was a failure. But I find that pales in comparison to what it DID accomplish. The current plan is a blatant attempt to not only take away insurance from 20+ million people, but to at the same time take a first step in destroying the social safety net by decimating Medicaid. So yes, BIG problems with the ACA, but it is not comparable to the travesty we are seeing offered at the moment. Because, at the core of the legislation, the ACA EXPANDED Medicaid (and it was designed to expand it much further) and the AHCA is trying to destroy it.
I've been told on a podcast I listen to if that if you actually are trying to bring someone over to your side and convince them, you need to lead with your values. Well, in this case, unlike some others, I WOULD like to convince people this bill is an abomination. And my values are that we don't defund the program that allows the elderly to live out their final years in a nursing home and not destitute, and that allows people who are disabled to live as independent a life as they are able to. And making sure children have health-care coverage regardless of their parent's socio-economic status. And those are the values this bill blows to smithereens.
This one matters. It matters more than Russia, it matters more than free speech on college campuses, and yes, it even matters more than terrorism. This is potentially life or death for millions of people.
@jjstraka34 Oh, no argument from me on the reasons, I know the why's and such, but knowing doesn't alleviate my being upset with both my state, NC (for #1), and the feds for not dealing with the core issue of the bigger problem of the drug and insurance companies (#2... and a BIG #2 is EXACTLY what it is ). I took alot of flak in public health for pointing out and predicting some of what the ACA was probably going to cause with prices and insurance companies. NC is down to bout one exchange and that is up about 80% for me. Some of it was 'ok' but it caused alot of problems and was not in my opinion well thought out for the long term. I most certainly do not think they took into consderation the rapidly changing aging demographics in the US. The influx of a big, and much younger group, latino's, and a MASSIVE increase in those going on medicare and SS (baby boomers, which still has not reached it's peak).
It is unfortunate now that many have got insurance because of thoses ACA 'fixes' it is going to come down harder many of those with 'GOPCARE' (unless the writers are super wise, and I don't see that one bit).
Agreed, this is causing ALOT of anger, and it is going to get hotter.
I am acutally surprised that things have been as peaceful (relatively) as they have been.
Comments
House Republicans voted for the "Wealthcare" bill that will take away healthcare from more than 20 million people and give tax cuts to people who are extremely wealthy.
These voters be like, "Yes please and be sure to cut education, social security, kill net neutrality, sell my search history, and slap me in the face while you are at it. Also if you could just light the countryside on fire and pour toxic waste in our rivers that's be great."
They see Trump's budget and are like yeah we need more of this and another 300 million dollar bonus for big oil CEOs by God!
Are people that clueless? Is gerrymandering this bad or is voter suppression this effective? I don't get it.
I'm not sure the anti-heckling thing is all that clear cut so I'm not going to comment on it.
Compare it to a late campaign rally Obama was holding for Hillary, when a Trump suppporter interrupted the proceeding. The crowd started to boo, and Obama stopped them and said that a.) he was elderly, and we should respect our elders and that b.) it appeared he was a veteran and had earned the right to speak his mind. Go watch it, it's on video. That is what the leader of the Democratic Party did in a tense protest situation. Trump, in similar situations, said to "knock the hell out of them." Pretty telling. Something that seems to have been lost down the memory hole is that, over the spring and summer, Trump was actively encouraging violence at his rallies from the podium on a weekly if not daily basis. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the major "draw" of Trump rallies during a certain portion of the campaign was the chance that you might see physical violence against a liberal protester.
Expressing an opinion doesn't amount to the use of force, but speech is sound, and if you crank it up loud enough, sound can actually cause physical damage (the military has actually made sonic weapons). That's the kind of situation in which loud speech is equal to coercive force.
To use a more normal example: by shouting loudly and repeatedly, a single person can prevent another single person from being heard or understood, and a group of people can completely drown out another person's voice. That's the heckler's veto: using one's voice to prevent another person from expressing their opinion.
Speaking of science fiction, Trump is in Iowa holding a rally tonight, still insisting that not only is Mexico going to pay for the wall, but that the wall will have SOLAR PANELS all along it that will generate revenue for the US. Ok then. So Republicans don't believe in climate change, support leaving the Paris climate deal, but they are all for a solar-powered wall on the Mexican border now that Trump says so. Mark it down. Mexico is paying for a solar panel border wall. Anyone got an extra $1000 lying around that says this never gets done?? Shit, why don't we builld a "coal wall" to create more coal jobs?? Or, as someone suggested on Twitter, maybe in addition to solar panels, we line the entire Mexican side with mirrors, so that potential wall jumpers are blinded by the sun's rays bouncing back into their eyes. Naturally, we will also need a wall-length mote on our end filled with sharks with laser beams attached to their heads as a bulwark against the truly determined. Possibly a 10 mile no-man's land beyond that filled with landmines to deter those who are exceptionally good swimmers.
He also said there should be a law that immigrants who enter the US shouldn't be eligible for welfare benefits for 5 years. So I guess it's a good thing there already IS a law that mandates EXACTLY that that has been on the books for, oh, you know, 21 YEARS.
Well la de da. Now that your boy is in the White House you decided to be done with the politics of hate. hahahahaha whatever dude. If Hillary was President and a Democrat got shot playing baseball would you be out there calling for us all to unite? Feck no he wouldn't. He didn't say boo before about hate crimes and he himself was calling for Obama to be lynched and Hillary to be shot etc etc etc.
Same with Kellyanne Conjob. A couple days ago she was saying we should all unite and tone down or whatever and then they barely win some ruby red gerrymandered special elections and she's being really classy.
Where's the civil political discourse you supposedly have been clamoring for?
And I'm shocked Trump restrained himself for a couple hours - the tweets yesterday were congratulations which were fine but then of course this morning he's back to gloating and attacking just as he did at his rally in front of Trumpists. He's too afraid to go in front of the public he'll only appear on Faux News and in front of low information crowds that would cheer him if he shot someone on fifth avenue or whatever like he said.
So no don't be shocked but Trump, Kellyanne, Mitch, Nugent and the rest of them don't want civil politics. And more shocking news is the sky is still blue!
EDIT: Do you think Donald Trump is right he said that he has been reaching out for Democratic votes for his healthcare plan and blasted Senate Democrats for obstructing his healthcare plan that none of them have seen since it's being made in secret. Just another misleading lie by the good old Prez.
Message to any future Democratic campaign: you run the video of that taking place, and then you tie the Republican running against you to it and blame them for it. You tie it around their ankles like a millstone. You tell the voters in your district that Republicans would as soon see the poor and disabled rot and die so they can fund a tax-break. You don't stay civil, you don't act nice and call for deficit reduction and bipartisan agreement. You shiv them. For christ sake, hit back, and hit back hard. Show some balls.
And a secret government refusing to appear in front of anyone that might ask questions? But let me guess,
it's ok because it's Republicans right.
Supposedly a couple of Republican Senators are hold outs but don't hold your breath, they are holding out for some donations. Sure they'll appear on camera for some publicity as the guy who stood up against this terrible bill and say golly I don't know about this, then they'll pass it anyway.
A couple more hundred thousand dollar campaign donations and they'll come around and pass it. That's what they're waiting for. And those donations are drops in the bucket for the guys these ultra wealthy Republican donors. A couple hundred thousand dollars is nothing compared to how much they'll save in taxes on their vast fortunes.
Let me break this down for you, this bill effects two groups of people. Millionaires who will save roughly 4% on income over $250,000, and people who have at least one loved one who relies on Medicaid who will be hurt. If you are reading this, I can guarantee you are in the later category rather than the former. This is a bill designed to make the poor and needy suffer to fund a tax break for people who will likely consider it a rounding error.
Now we know why. It's awful.
And congrats Georgia voters for encouraging this and letting the GOP know they can get away with anything.
I'll bring this up again, because it's something that will resonate if this happens. Medicaid pays for 60% of people in nursing homes. And even white, suburban Republicans who make $100,000/year who think they are immune and apart from those who "leech" off their tax dollars are going to feel it when they either have to start shelling out thousands of dollars a month to pay to keep mom in a nursing home, or they have to renovate their guest room to make it a suitable living space for an ailing senior citizen. Many of these people have very little empathy for anyone ELSE this hurts, but they will get indignant damn quick if it touches them.
We're getting some momentum - last week the democrats were apparently thinking of not fighting at all, and now they're starting to get some backbone. But...we'll see.
No matter what we do (we being the reasonable people who are not receiving bribes from the wealthy) the political liars will spin it. And people are going to be hurting and Republicans will continue playing games to get their donors tax breaks until they are not paying taxes. Even then they wouldn't represent us, they'd want their owners to earn salary in taxes. They gotta go out of office, vote em out.
We need medicare for all. And we should be investing in real education to pump out more quality doctors and scientists and solving real problems. Math and science, lets lead the world again in those areas instead of cutting and dumbing everything down so we have clueless consumers supporting kingly lifestyles for the rich.
And then you have this.....atrocity that the Republicans are attempting to pass. I mean, it is really hard to wrap you head around a bill that's primary function is to kick 20+ million people off coverage, raise deductibles, eliminates essential benefits, brings BACK pre-existing conditions and lifetime limits, and take a chainsaw to Medicaid, which is the backbone of support for those with disabilities, rural hospitals, nursing homes, those who require in-home care etc etc etc. I mean, I saw a poll today that showed it polling at 16%. What the hell is in this thing that these 16% of people support?? Who is this for?? It's not a health care bill, it's simply step one in their tax cut plan. And, while some people will surely die because they don't have insurance, many more will still seek treatment. In emergency rooms. Which is the most ineffective (both financially and health-wise) way to treat someone. And the hospitals are not going to eat that loss. If 20+ million people who have insurance now DON'T in a few years, YOU are going to pay for it because the insurance companies will raise their rates to make-up for the astronomical costs of people flooding emergency rooms.
I mean, this is one part sticking it to liberals and Obama and trying to erase his Presidency, one part giveaway to millionaires, and the rest is just a sociopathic lust to see poor people suffer. I've been saving things all day that I read to revisit and post about here, but I don't even know where to start, to be honest. But for now, I'll end with this, to conservatives: Yelling about how bad liberals are isn't going to pay your health care bills. It's not going to save you if your kid gets cancer and you hit your lifetime limit within 6 months and your insurance company, which doesn't give as shit about you, literally, pulls the plug on you. Most of these Medicaid cuts are going to hit deep red States, and god knows the problems I have with Trump voters, but for the love of god, I still want them to be able to have health insurance. Society cannot function in the Ayn Rand fantasy-land Republicans are trying to implement. The center will not hold.
Not to put a spotlight on anyone, but @BelleSorciere has said she relies on Medicaid. I know in the past @ThacoBell has mentioned that he falls outside the range of the subsidies, and may also have a child who has medical issues (though I don't remember for sure on that one, apologies if it's incorrect). So let's work to FIX that issue and continue to help those who receive Medicaid as well, and not support this cruel and heartless legislation. Because the issues affecting your fellow forumites may not apply to your life right now, but I can say with total certainty that one day they WILL, and you will need someone to have your back. The Republican health plan does not. For anyone.
Look we've been saying for months - hey this train's headed off a cliff. Yet people keep voting for these guys. The Republican plan is a much worse Obamacare. And people are going to die. Mitch McConnell,Trump, and the rest of them don't care. They're going to get their tax cuts for their donors.
I guess these Trump voters don't see the train headed off the tracks until it affects them. It's like those Trump voters who voted for Trump to kick out the illegal immigrants but didn't think that meant he would kick out their illegal immigrant wife or husband. You can only tell people hey you're making a huge mistake until you are blue in the face, they have to see it themselves. Sad.
And then this woman, confronting one of the key Senators in this vote, in a brave and important moment:
And....this, I mean....wow. They are basically trying to cut nearly a trillion dollars from a social program that covers all of THIS:
Bout as nice as I can get after seeing what parts of the (un) affordable health care act has done to premiums and drug prices over the last few years, and what the GOP secretive group may be going to do to poorer, older, and preexisting folks.
I am coming more strongly to the conclusion that the democratic process as used by the majority of POLITICIANS in power, all sides, is starting to fail more than ever.
This capitalistic profit based healthcare INDUSTRY (not system) in the US just can't seem to help itself but try and hold out as long as it can.
Too many folks holding on to positions and not the real interests for the mutual gain of all.
So the problem is this: America has shown no willingness to move from it's for-profit model of healthcare, despite no other developed country having such a system, and indeed, the idea of any European country or Canada DOING AWAY with their national health-care is so far beyond the third-rail that even the most conservative politicians would never run on such a platform and be taken seriously. Taking into account that we are, for the moment, stuck in an immoral and insane way of providing healthcare, the ACA was a flawed but GENUINE ATTEMPT to get more people covered, and, again, do away with the heinous practices of pre-existing conditions, lifetime caps, and provide essential coverage. And the ONLY way to ensure the last 3 was to implement the individual mandate and work with our existing (and wholly immoral) system of insurance companies. Because there was not political will to do otherwise. But more importantly, there was no voter will to do so from the center or the right. If you thought the town halls of that summer were bad for what the ACA actually was, imagine if Obama had tried to just flat-out nationalize healthcare in one swoop. It would have never happened. I think that's what we need to do, but I also realize what country I am living in and what the political realities are.
You will find very few on the left who think the ACA is even CLOSE to perfect. It's got major problems, mostly because it didn't go nearly far enough for most of us. But I recognize that, for many people covered by it's 3 main tenants, it has saved lives. The testimonials of it are everywhere. Are rising premiums a problem, especially for those that fall outside being able to get help?? Absolutely, and good faith attempts need to be made to improve and fix those things. Social Security was a damn mess initially as well, foremost because it completely excluded African-Americans because of how it was implemented and what jobs African-Americans worked in at the time. But, at it's core, given the realities of how we deal with health-care, it was a sincere attempt to #1.) cover more people and #2.) completely do away with the most blatant predatory practices of the insurance industry we all hate. And it accomplished both goals. Premium rates not so much. That part was a failure. But I find that pales in comparison to what it DID accomplish. The current plan is a blatant attempt to not only take away insurance from 20+ million people, but to at the same time take a first step in destroying the social safety net by decimating Medicaid. So yes, BIG problems with the ACA, but it is not comparable to the travesty we are seeing offered at the moment. Because, at the core of the legislation, the ACA EXPANDED Medicaid (and it was designed to expand it much further) and the AHCA is trying to destroy it.
I've been told on a podcast I listen to if that if you actually are trying to bring someone over to your side and convince them, you need to lead with your values. Well, in this case, unlike some others, I WOULD like to convince people this bill is an abomination. And my values are that we don't defund the program that allows the elderly to live out their final years in a nursing home and not destitute, and that allows people who are disabled to live as independent a life as they are able to. And making sure children have health-care coverage regardless of their parent's socio-economic status. And those are the values this bill blows to smithereens.
This one matters. It matters more than Russia, it matters more than free speech on college campuses, and yes, it even matters more than terrorism. This is potentially life or death for millions of people.
I took alot of flak in public health for pointing out and predicting some of what the ACA was probably going to cause with prices and insurance companies. NC is down to bout one exchange and that is up about 80% for me.
Some of it was 'ok' but it caused alot of problems and was not in my opinion well thought out for the long term. I most certainly do not think they took into consderation the rapidly changing aging demographics in the US. The influx of a big, and much younger group, latino's, and a MASSIVE increase in those going on medicare and SS (baby boomers, which still has not reached it's peak).
It is unfortunate now that many have got insurance because of thoses ACA 'fixes' it is going to come down harder many of those with 'GOPCARE' (unless the writers are super wise, and I don't see that one bit).
Agreed, this is causing ALOT of anger, and it is going to get hotter.
I am acutally surprised that things have been as peaceful (relatively) as they have been.