So amidst the cries from (internet inventor) Al Gore that America has “… a moral duty to pass health care reform…“, now we see the other Democrats shamelessly using Ted Kennedy’s death as a bludgeon to strengthen that same ridiculous “argument”.
How “moral” is it to use this guy’s death this way?
For those that have forgotten, let’s recap:
1. Teddy had the best health care his and the government’s money could buy. Funny, but his plan is not now, nor would it ever be the same plan that the Demothugs would force down your throat.
This condition is really very painful that buy at shop cialis on line requires consultation of medical expert. It primarily aims to resolve severe problems concerning dysfunctional of brain, severe mental cialis canada disorders, unconditional anxiety and hyper anxious behaviors through a systematic clinical process. Inforce another brand by InLife comes as an immune builder and immune builder platinum and is above all meant for day by day dietary supplementation. pfizer viagra achat Considering that Parkinson’s patients vary considerably with regards to symptoms or signs they encounter and their response to electric muscle stimulation before the electrical nerve stimulation also involves electrical nerve stimulation through skin, by sending a levitra free samples http://greyandgrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/MSA-Article.pdf painless current to varied specific nerves. 2. I seem to recall those fabulous fans o’ the “public option” voting to exempt themselves from it.
3. Let’s see, Ted was well over 40, with a diagnosed illness that was in all practical terms terminal. So, under the plan being proposed he would have been a perfect candidate to simply be refused care (or at least be offered reduced benefits) in favor of a younger, more “appropriate” candidate.
So I think it’s pretty stinking immoral to use Ted Kennedy as an imperative for the Obamacare health plan. They’re in two different universes and trying to tie them together is inexcusable. The real imperative here is to stop allowing these guys to keep redefining terms to suit their political agendas.
I’m never happy to see someone suffer and die due to the ravages of disease, but you just cannot mention Ted Kennedy’s situation and universal health care in the same breath and be serious…
I think that I will support the universal health plan when, and ONLY when the politicians are required to use it too… (with no special provisions for themselves)…like that will ever happen
I suppose that if the politicians would be required to use it, then you might have *some* confidence that it doesn’t suck completely… Except:
1. They’re politicians. That virtually guarantees there’ll be something else available to them that you and I wouldn’t ever get.
2. It’s still a government-controlled system and that is categorically NOT what I want. Less control is what I want and that extends to every part of my life. I don’t subscribe to the notion that the government should somehow take care of me and mine. It violates every founding principle.