Eww. not good, tea party!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 1:27 AM GMT
    Question during debate:

    30 yr old healthy guy 'opts' not to buy health coverage. Gets in catastrophic accident. Who pays?


    Rhetorical question from moderator after a few answers by candidates:
    Are you just going to let him die?
    Some from the crowd shout YEAH!

    That my friends, is not going over very well.. at all!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 1:54 AM GMT
    Wow! I am REALLY glad I didnt miss this debate! Im hoping the entire country watched it.


    Boy oh boy are there some seriously ill-informed and dangerous folks representing this 'tea party' group.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:11 AM GMT
    Yes, the debate was an ugly angry mess.
    Which isn't really surprising, since it was partly sponsored by the Tea Party.

    It was full of factual inaccuracies as well.

    The Repubs may be able to get away with factual inaccuracies during this nomination fight but in the general election the kind of falsehoods being spewed out by the Repubs running for the nom will be fact checked and called out.

    We're also really starting to see the bitter fight between Perry and Romney that I expected to see, develop.
    The acrimony between the two of them is coming along nicely.

    As the two of them continue to separate themselves from the rest of the field, and it becomes a real two person mano-a-mano fight, the bitterness and attacks back and forth between them will grow and grow.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:21 AM GMT
    RickRick91 saidYes, the debate was an ugly angry mess.
    Which isn't really surprising, since it was partly sponsored by the Tea Party.

    It was full of factual inaccuracies as well.

    The Repubs may be able to get away with factual inaccuracies during this nomination fight but in the general election the kind of falsehoods being spewed out by the Repubs running for the nom will be fact checked and called out.

    We're also really starting to see the bitter fight between Perry and Romney that I expected to see, develop.
    The acrimony between the two of them is coming along nicely.

    As the two of them continue to separate themselves from the rest of the field, and it becomes a real two person mano-a-mano fight, the bitterness and attacks back and forth between them will grow and grow.

    And vicious it was! Whew.. guess they forgot the 2008 election.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:49 AM GMT


    It wasn't a crowd that yelled "yeah!" (maybe 10-20 people) but the applause before that was pretty damning.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:55 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 said

    It wasn't a crowd that yelled "yeah!" (maybe 10-20 people) but the applause before that was pretty damning.
    I knew that was gonna be played.. yeah its awful damning! Thanks for the video.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:55 AM GMT
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/sep/12/Fact-checking-cnn-tea-party-express-gop-debate/

    2 pants on fire (regurgitated points about the stimulus)
    1 false (SS= Ponzi scheme again?)
    1 mostly false (Perry and his HPV vaccine)
    1 half true (Huntsman and job creation)
    1 true (that's Romney saying that Perry wrote that Social Security is a 'failure')
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 4:22 AM GMT
    jprichva saidThe Republican Party has lost its moral compass, if it ever had one. Like the crowd at the debate cheering for the number of executions that Perry has presided over. Even if you're a fan of the death penalty, it's beyond disgusting to cheer about it.


    That was uncalled for. I'm not a fan of the death penalty mostly because of prosecutorial misconduct. One life taken ‘mistakenly’ is too many. It hasn’t happened all that often, but on the hand, that’s way too often.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Sep 13, 2011 5:03 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    q1w2e3 said

    It wasn't a crowd that yelled "yeah!" (maybe 10-20 people) but the applause before that was pretty damning.
    I knew that was gonna be played.. yeah its awful damning! Thanks for the video.



    Sorry, but if there is anything I appreciate about Ron Paul it is the fact that he speaks his mind and lets the cards fall where they may. The question was about a 30 year old man who had a good job, could afford health insurance, but opted to not have it. Ron Paul's answer that the man should take responsibility for his decision was appropriate given the context of the question.
  • Bigolbear

    Posts: 528

    Sep 13, 2011 5:05 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 said

    It wasn't a crowd that yelled "yeah!" (maybe 10-20 people) but the applause before that was pretty damning.


    I can't believe the crowd didn't boo the person who shouted "Yeah!!" when they suggested to let this hypothetical guy die. It shoots down the title "pro-life".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 5:15 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said


    Sorry, but if there is anything I appreciate about Ron Paul it is the fact that he speaks his mind and lets the cards fall where they may. The question was about a 30 year old man who had a good job, could afford health insurance, but opted to not have it. Ron Paul's answer that the man should take responsibility for his decision was appropriate given the context of the question.
    NO ONE said Ron Paul did anything 'wrong'... reread the first post.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Sep 13, 2011 6:27 AM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    As the two of them continue to separate themselves from the rest of the field, and it becomes a real two person mano-a-mano fight, the bitterness and attacks back and forth between them will grow and grow.




    You might want to get use to it, RickRick, because there is a very real possibility that someone on that stage tonight may very well be the next POTUS
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 8:00 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    TropicalMark said
    q1w2e3 said

    It wasn't a crowd that yelled "yeah!" (maybe 10-20 people) but the applause before that was pretty damning.
    I knew that was gonna be played.. yeah its awful damning! Thanks for the video.



    Sorry, but if there is anything I appreciate about Ron Paul it is the fact that he speaks his mind and lets the cards fall where they may. The question was about a 30 year old man who had a good job, could afford health insurance, but opted to not have it. Ron Paul's answer that the man should take responsibility for his decision was appropriate given the context of the question.


    What if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 1:05 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said
    What if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?
    Thats the 'bigger picture'... kinda sad huh? Notice the ignorance?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 1:32 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidWhat if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?

    Yeah, out of work because they were "downsized" when their company sent US jobs overseas to make more profits. Or maybe a mortgage broker who went broke, when the decision makers above him made bad sub-prime loans that he had nothing to do about. The execs bailed with bonuses and golden parachutes, and he got canned, now unable to make his own mortgage payments or anything else, including health insurance premiums, lacking his former employer's health plan.

    Yep, let's just let these people die in an accident. It's the Republican way. Just claim they're crackheads, welfare moms and illegal aliens, and we can all turn our backs and feel no guilt.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Sep 13, 2011 2:10 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said

    What if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?



    But, you're missing the point --- That wasn't the question. The question was very specific in using the example of a healthy man, with a good job, who could afford health insurance but, like so many people, opted to not get it. Ron Paul didn't say "Let Him Die", but rather made the very valid point that the man should be responsible for his own decision. He also went even further to point out how, before Medicare, communities (and specifically Churches) came together to help people in need within the community.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:20 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    DoomsDayAlpaca said

    What if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?



    But, you're missing the point --- That wasn't the question. The question was very specific in using the example of a healthy man, with a good job, who could afford health insurance but, like so many people, opted to not get it. Ron Paul didn't say "Let Him Die", but rather made the very valid point that the man should be responsible for his own decision. He also went even further to point out how, before Medicare, communities (and specifically Churches) came together to help people in need within the community.



    Explain how the man should be responsible. I'm curious as to what that action would be. Sell a kidney or a lung so he can buy some help?


    ...and that old way of religious charity didn't work. It was uneven, had favouritism, and most often was completely overwhelmed.
    This 30 year old was paying taxes, good ones from the sounds of it, if he had a good job.

    So should he just lay down on a street corner til he dies? In a park? Perhaps on your front steps?

    Yikes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:25 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    DoomsDayAlpaca said

    What if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?



    But, you're missing the point --- That wasn't the question. The question was very specific in using the example of a healthy man, with a good job, who could afford health insurance but, like so many people, opted to not get it. Ron Paul didn't say "Let Him Die", but rather made the very valid point that the man should be responsible for his own decision. He also went even further to point out how, before Medicare, communities (and specifically Churches) came together to help people in need within the community.


    The question was very specific to a young person because they represent a large percentage of the uninsured in USA. Young people who have access to health insurance but who choose not to pay it because they dont think they need it.

    The question was relevant and ron paul's answer was consistent with his policies. He did comment about how to provide treatment before medicare. the villians here are the audience members and their cold blooded lack of compassion for humanity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:29 PM GMT



    Why not get the guy help, then once back on his feet and working, garnish his wage for past help provided?



  • Bigolbear

    Posts: 528

    Sep 13, 2011 2:30 PM GMT
    meninlove said


    Explain how the man should be responsible. I'm curious as to what that action would be. Sell a kidney or a lung so he can buy some help?


    ...and that old way of religious charity didn't work. It was uneven, had favouritism, and most often was completely overwhelmed.
    This 30 year old was paying taxes, good ones from the sounds of it, if he had a good job.

    So should he just lay down on a street corner til he dies? In a park? Perhaps on your front steps?

    Yikes.



    +
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:32 PM GMT
    meninlove said


    Why not get the guy help, then once back on his feet and working, garnish his wage for past help provided?





    Well, that isn't a bad idea, but the medical community doesn't want that. but the point of the thread is the very revealing attitudes prevalent in the tea party.

    and while I am not a fan of Ron Paul (for some of his other views) I really dont blame him for this. HE didn't say anything inconsistent with his views or inhumane. It was the crowd. shocking.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Sep 13, 2011 2:36 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Explain how the man should be responsible. I'm curious as to what that action would be. Sell a kidney or a lung so he can buy some help?



    I don't think anyone, including Ron Paul, really wants to allow the man to die. However, this all really comes down to WHEN and WHERE do we draw the line as to the extent of which the Government becomes responsible for the irresponsibility of individual citizen's decisions? There is a reason that this question specifically noted "a healthy man, with a good job, who could afford insurance but opted to not own any". What if ALL Americans who could afford insurance, opted out because they know the Government will be there to save them? The Government would be even more in debt than it already is. The Government simply cannot, nor should they, be expected to be the savior of Americans who, by their own choosing, make irresponsible decisions.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:36 PM GMT
    Alpha_Muscle said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    DoomsDayAlpaca said

    What if the question was about anyone of any age who couldn't afford coverage? What then?



    But, you're missing the point --- That wasn't the question. The question was very specific in using the example of a healthy man, with a good job, who could afford health insurance but, like so many people, opted to not get it. Ron Paul didn't say "Let Him Die", but rather made the very valid point that the man should be responsible for his own decision. He also went even further to point out how, before Medicare, communities (and specifically Churches) came together to help people in need within the community.


    The question was very specific to a young person because they represent a large percentage of the uninsured in USA. Young people who have access to health insurance but who choose not to pay it because they dont think they need it.

    The question was relevant and ron paul's answer was consistent with his policies. He did comment about how to provide treatment before medicare. the villians here are the audience members and their cold blooded lack of compassion for humanity.


    For most people (especially my age) it's a simple fact of "can't get it". Before everything changed once you turned 18 you were no longer covered by your parents insurance unless you are in college full time. For people who are working multiple jobs without benefits(or even one job where they give you just enough hours to NOT qualify as full time), or have any other obligation that prevents them from going to school full time it can be tough.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2011 2:39 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    meninlove said
    Explain how the man should be responsible. I'm curious as to what that action would be. Sell a kidney or a lung so he can buy some help?



    I don't think anyone, including Ron Paul, really wants to allow the man to die. However, this all really comes down to WHEN and WHERE do we draw the line as to the extent of which the Government becomes responsible for the irresponsibility of individual citizen's decisions? There is a reason that this question specifically noted "a healthy man, with a good job, who could afford insurance but opted to not own any". What if ALL Americans who could afford insurance, opted out because they know the Government will be there to save them? The Government would be even more in debt than it already is. The Government simply cannot, nor should they, be expected to be the savior of Americans who, by their own choosing, make irresponsible decisions.


    But that question is almost fiction, in reality its someone who has a "pre-existing condition", a job that screws them on hours (I had a job that used to cut us 1.5 hours short of qualifying as full time), unemployed, or broke students.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Sep 13, 2011 2:48 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said

    But that question is almost fiction, in reality its someone who has a "pre-existing condition", a job that screws them on hours (I had a job that used to cut us 1.5 hours short of qualifying as full time), unemployed, or broke students.



    Actually, the question is NOT fiction. In reality, there are millions of Americans who can afford health insurance but because they are seemingly healthy they opt to not pay the roughly $300 a month for health coverage. This was specifically what this particular question, and how it was worded, was addressing. Medicare is suppose to be for people like yourself who either cannot afford health coverage, or due to pre-existing conditions or whatever, are not able to obtain it. It's the people who CAN afford it who are posing an unnecessary drain on the system. Medicare is intended for those in need, NOT those who are not in need but simply make poor decisions regarding their own personal responsibility for their own health care.