1/26: Tea Partiers for Independent Health Care
Posted by Editor on January 26, 2010 · 20 Comments
Tea Party plans “Declaration of Health Care Independence” rally in D.C. as Obama meets with House Republicans:
The tea party is coming to Capitol Hill. Hours before the president’s speech on Wednesday, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), one of the lawmakers most closely allied with the movement, and FreedomWorks will hold an event with conservative activists and lawmakers to tout a “Declaration of Health Care Independence.” An aide to Bachmann said the proposal would “protect the rights of the American to make their own health decisions,” as well as include 10 conservative ideas for future health reform.
The health-care event is one of the first steps the tea-party movement will take this year as it seeks to expand its influence. At a news conference Monday, FreedomWorks put out a list of candidates it is backing or opposing in key races this year. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R), a candidate for the Senate; Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.); and Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) each are labeled an “Enemy of Liberty” whom the group will oppose. FreedomWorks will back GOP Senate candidates Marco Rubio (Fla.), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Rand Paul (Ky.) — each, according to the group, is a “Champion of Freedom.”
Now I am a conservitive and I think that to many liberial’s think that the government should give them everything they want on a silver platter. JCS do you honstly believe that government should be the ones to take care of all your problems, do think the rest of us want to pay for what you want. Yes health care is expensive but if you need national health care go to England they will provide you with all that you seek.
You’re misrepresenting opinion of someone who support universal healthcare, something you can not only get in England but in every single other westernized democracy in the world. And FYI, I’m not on the receiving end of government handouts, and farther on giving end that the larger part of our country.
No, people are liberal because they have sympathy for others less fortunate, people who can’t help themselves. It’s a question of values. Do you want to live in a country where the government gives the rich everything they want? So they can own five houses instead of three? Or you want to live in a country where we judge ourselves not by how well we treat the rich, but how well we treat the destitute.
Are you religious?
Liberals have sympathy for people “less fortunate.”
It is a question of values. So to help those who can’t help themselves, they don’t use their own resources, but use force to take from others.
No, I don’t want government to give the rich everything they want. I want to live in a country where people judge by themselves and pitch in with their own resources to treat the destitute, and not at the point of a gun.
Well apperently I am not allowed to comment on this discussion but jcs I could tell you stories that would make you toenails curl. I don’t agree with you on many things but that does not mean that I haven’t done my research.
talindra I’d love to hear your stories, and I mean that sincerely. Life can be hard. If you’ve had trouble I’m on your side. That’s the liberal in me.
The democrats are no more interested in health care than the republicans have been. This was all about creating a one party political system. Thank God, enough people in MA came to their senses and sent a mesage to Washington.
I never uinderstood how taking 500 billion from our frail senior citizens was going to benefit them never mind the additional billions billed to our unborn citizensof the future.
Yes, health care should be reformed but needs to be done the right way, for the right reasons and for the right people.
NM, unless you would care to offer details about what health care reform should look like, please zip it. Saying that the current health care bills in the House and Senate are not “done the right way” doesn’t contribute to the conversation. What is the “right way”?
Sonny
jcs you complain alot but don’t offer much other than your whinning.
Here is the problem, The Federal Goverment dose not have the right under the constitution to create national health care. The goverment did not have the authority under the constitution to start social security, but they did it anyway. And look at the mess it is in. There will never be enough money to pay for s.s. ever.. Health care for everyone sounds great. The reality of it all is more people will be hurt with health care then with out it . Right now in this country there is grant moneys available from private companys that pay for many people who are in need. I know because my family has benefited from these grants twice. First my wife had eye surgery that restored her sight. That would have cost us $80,000.. My sister survide cancer. When grant money paid 3 million dollars. For my sister’s surgery, chemo therapy and radiation treatment. That saved my sister’s life and my wife’s sight !!!! This was all paid by private companys. NOT THE GOVERMENT AND NOT BY NSURANCE COMPANYS….
The Supreme Court has decided in several cases that Social Security is constitutional. AM radio pundits don’t decide what is constitutional or not. That’s the job of the Supreme Court, as defined by the United States Constitution.
Have you ever herd of the Dred Scott decision ? That when the supreme court said that Black people were property and not people. Have you ever herd of emiment domain cases that came before the supreme court. And the court took citizens homes and lands from them, and gave it to the state and local goverments. Just so city and county goverments could get more tax money. I can not really think of a time when the supreme court has made a right decision for anyone in this country. The 10th Amendment to the Constitution is suppose to protect us from the goverment in the cases of social security and national health care. But the supreme court never herd of the Constitution.
Bryan, “The Supreme Court never heard of the Constitution”? That’s a goofy statement, and puts you on the fringe. Why do you hate the Constitution?
Yes, I’ve heard of Dred Scott. It’s ironic that you’d make that reference. The Constitution hasn’t changed since then, but the world has.
jcs you like to attack people and twist there words alot. My comments didn’t say anything like that. You have lost all credibility with me..
I hope it doesn’t sound like I’m attacking you Bryan. Is “goofy” too strong a word? I may not agree with the Supreme Court (especially this last ruling allowing unlimited corporate funding for campagns – governement for the rich, by the rich…), but I imagine they know the Constitution pretty well. Better than Limbaugh anyway.
Bryan, I “twisted your words?” I quoted you for Heaven’s sake. I “attacked you”? You made a totally nonsensical statement, IMO, and I pointed that out. Read some of replies I get and you can find a lot worse words than goofy applied to me.
As always, I’m astonished by this. Every single other industrialized country in the world has some form of universal health care. These countries are not totalitarian, Marxist, Communist countries, they’re western democracies like the US. Many of these countries have a higher standard of living than the US and all rank lower on health care for the average US citizen that other westernized democracies.
Every dollar an insurance company pays you is a dollar off of their bottom line. Their business is to make as many dollars as possible. The idea than insurance companies are the “good guys” and government is the “bad guys” is irrational.
It’s our system, for better or worse, but it’s sad to see American’s suckered into buying into ideas that take money out of their pockets. Big business (Freedom Works) certainly gets the PT Barnum award this year.
There does need to be a reform in health care. But do you seriously believe that we rank lower on health care, or rank lower on who is covered? Where would you rather live, in those other countries where they have univeral health care, with their health care system or would you rather be in the U.S. with the kind of care you would get here? What astonishes me is that for the most part, people who are uninsured are uninsured because they choose to live a lifestyle of bigger and better, having the best cars, the nicest homes, etc… We as people of the U.S. have forgotten to sacrifice “things” in life instead of have insurance. Priority??? I don’t enjoy paying my premiums, but it is my responsibility to pay for my medical costs, not somebody elses responsibility. RESPONSIBILITY? hmmm.
I’d disagree with you on several points. The World Health Organization wrote an extensive report in 2000 ranking the US 37th in the world for health of it’s citizens.
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
You can follow the links for the basis of the ranking. I don’t doubt the US has the best health care facilities, but not the best health care for individuals.
I agree that people need to act responsibly and set priorities for how they spend their money. But I strongly disagree with your idea that people don’t have insurance out of choice. !0% of the US is now unemployeed and I doubt many of them can afford health insurance without a job. Even when they find work, how many will be unable to get insurance because of pre-existing conditions, which almost everyone has over some age.
It’s easy to avert your eyes from the poor and say they should work harder or whatever. But reality of poverty isn’t quite that simple.
You can’t always rely on those rankings. Example:
Cuba had one of the worst infant mortality rates in the world. In the span of a few years, they shot up to one of the best. What they didn’t tell you was that they monitor the unborn fetus and abort any deamed “in trouble”. They don’t count those. So, technically, they haven’t really improved their infant mortality rate, only the way they guage it.
I can’t speak for everyone, but for me, the issue is out of control government. Our government is taking alot on themselves and have been for quite awhile. They DO NOT have the authority to tell you that you HAVE to buy health insurance under penalty of a fine and/or jail time. And while I do believe that people with pre-existing conditions need help, forcing the insurance companies to take them is not the answer. It WILL raise EVERYONES premiums. Since the idea is to get costs down, good intentions don’t go very far. What about a National Charity? Add one line to the IRS form “Do you want to donate to the “Pre-existing Condition Fund?” Then write the amount in the box and they deduct that from your refund. Have a committee to determine eligiblity – determined by how many years that person has paid into the healthcare system and work your way down. All I keep hearing is how Americans are the most charitable people in the world. Make no mistake, this healthcare bill is about CONTROL – not those without coverage.
bch, I disagree with you on almost every point. But I appreciate your intelligent, informed reply. I’d reply with spirit but this website won’t let me. I appreciate posts like yours.