The audacity of the citizens of this nation actually wanting things to make their lives more sustainable. (Not going into debt for having your children hospitalized? Thats the epitome of greed!!!) The bulk of the post linked above is golden. I’m blown away by the crassness, and the arrogance of the Romney camp. In some way they talked over the NAACP (who were at least gracious enough to play along) in a calculated move to not score points with the (justly dubious) audience at the event, but those at home who have bought the racial scapegoating “all minority interests = special interests” position on the whole.
An excerpt from the Maddow Blog on the subject:
There is a pattern to this. If you’re a woman who wants access to preventive care you might not otherwise be able to afford, Romney sees you as wanting “free stuff.” If you’re a young student who can’t afford higher-ed tuition, Romney assumes you expect “free stuff.”
And if you’re an African American supporter of the NAACP who wants your family to have access to affordable health care, Romney suspects you’re just looking for “free stuff.”
You see, Mr. Car Elevator already has vast wealth, thanks to his rich family and vulture-capital firm that reaped benefits by laying off American workers. And now that he has riches, Romney seems annoyed by the little people who keep asking public institutions to provide basic government benefits as part of a sound safety net and/or access to economic opportunities.
It seems insane to me that a presidential candidate would adopt such an elitist attitude during difficult economic times, but Mitt Romney is a special kind of candidate.
[TW: Rape] Nobody is saying that we should make rape jokes illegal (I'm assuming)
If that’s really what you want to do than that is your right. Directly suggesting that someone should be raped is harassment but just considering the subject matter if you want to get your yuks from reinforcing a culture that violently oppresses women that is still your right.
But BUT! It also happens to be our right to not support it. It is our right to label you a fucking sexist and an awful person who is contributing to that culture. Our right to complain and protest, our right to broadcast our disdain, our right to not buy albums or watch tv specials.
It is ultimately our right to not find rape jokes funny and feel that people who find them funny are fucking assholes and tools.
The secondhand embarrassment-inducing speech he gave to the NAACP and his confused reaction to boos has made me practically GIDDY with anticipation for the presidential debates. I can barely contain myself.
“It was no different than any other wedding I’ve attended when you have two people who are in love with each other.”—Texas Rep. Al Green • On going to the wedding of Rep. Barney Frank and his longtime partner, James Ready, on Saturday. Current Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick officiated the ceremony, noting (jokingly) that the couple vowed to love one another through Republican and Democratic administrations alike. Though Frank is usually very media-friendly, the soon-to-retire congressman kept his wedding private. “We’re not doing any media today,” he told Reuters. Good for them! (via shortformblog)
Colombia’s Constitutional Court Friday approved the government’s proposal to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of cocaine and marijuana for personal use. Anyone caught with less than 20 grams of marijuana or one gram of cocaine for personal use may receive physical or psychological treatment depending on their state of consumption, but may not be prosecuted or detained, the court ruled.
Colombia’s move is part of a growing trend in Latin America. After decades of being brutalized by the U.S. government’s failed prohibitionist drug policies, Latin American leaders are saying “enough is enough.”
Last week, the government of Uruguay announced that it will submit a proposal to legalize marijuana under government-controlled regulation and sale, making it the first country in the world where the state would sell marijuana directly to its citizens. The proposal was drafted by Uruguayan President José Mujica and his staff and requires parliamentary approval before being enacted.
What I don’t think the rich (and those who support them) truly understand is that we, the 99%, don’t want to punish them for being rich.
We don’t want to take away what they’ve earned, or ultimately change their way of life. Ultimately all we want, at the most basic level, is to die at a comfortable age amongst our family and know that they are taken care of. In my heart of hearts I think that’s all the 1% really want out of life too.
Really that lies at the crux of why universal health care is so damn important. Why we’re fighting so hard to give everyone that simple opportunity (or the best opportunity possible) to die reasonably happy.
“Pick any other Republican in the country. He is the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama… [he later clarified] On the issue of health care. That’s what I was talking about, and I was very clear about talking about that… I was talking about Obamacare, and he is the worst because he was the author of Romneycare.”—That Time Rick Santorum Was Really Really Right
WASHINGTON, D.C. — More than two years after Obamacare passed, a longtime Republican congressman admits that his party has “no” plan to replace it if they succeed in getting rid of the landmark health law.
Before the Supreme Court ruling was released yesterday, ThinkProgress spoke with Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) about what Republicans would do to protect the 57 million Americans who have pre-existing conditions. “We’re going to work on that,” Terry promised, offering no specifics beyond “there’s going to be lots of ideas. We just have to accept all of them.”
When we pressed him on whether, two years later, Republicans had come up with the “replace” part of “repeal and replace,” Terry was frank: “no.”
KEYES: If it does ultimately all get struck down,what do we do for 57 million people who have pre-existing conditions?
TERRY:We’re going to work on that.We’re going to do it by looking at first, how do we lower health care costs, how do we make the system more efficient and less costly.
KEYES: Are there any ideas on how to do that?
TERRY: There’s going to be lots of ideas. We just have to accept all of them.
KEYES: Do we have any yet?
TERRY: We’re going to hold hearings, we’re going to invite experts. This is not going to be a closed process at all. It’s going to be completely open where we take as many ideas for reform as we can get and then we’ll see what it takes to deal with those that need more attention if they have significant pre-existing. So we’re going to deal with all of those issues.
KEYES:The mantra for a while has been “repeal and replace.” Is there an idea of what the replace would be yet?
TERRY: No. We want to take it in a very deliberate, open approach and take everybody’s ideas.
Republicans controlled Congress for most of the past two decades, yet did nothing to protect people with pre-existing conditions from health insurers who wanted to deny them coverage. Nor did they have any plan to help the tens of millions of Americans who lacked health insurance.
Though the GOP is again harping the “repeal and replace” mantra, it’s clear their plan begins and ends at step one.
If the Republicans wanted more people to have health care why don't they amend the ACA rather than repealing it?
Big question I’ve had for a long time. They keep using that phrase “Repeal and Replace,” well, replace with what? If you legitimately want to reform health care why not just attempt to fix what you believe is broken with the big ass law we already passed?
Of course the reality is they don’t want to improve health care and health care access. They want you to pay up or die. What have they done to the contrary?