I'm in a passionate mood tonight. Sorry guys.
Ody said I was part of the 53% supporting the other 47 percent. How would I be doing that unless they were all unemployed, under employed, or somehow on government assistance? But wait! Romney says I'm part of the 47% who wants the government do do everything for me. Whose right? Am I the mooch or am I supporting the mooches (47% of this country)?
For years now, you all have portrayed this idea that if you believe in government helping the poor, then you're a Socialist. You believe in exploiting the rich to ensure that the poor doesn't have to work. That's the crap you all have been spewing for years. I'm tired of it because I know it isn't true. I believe in hard work just as much as you all do, and I get tired of your side saying differently.
- Good point. Not everybody in this situation votes Democrat, but they're obviously part of the group of people who would benefit from a change in the healthcare system. They may not want to vote for what best suites their interests, but I do. Just like some of you all think my rights as a Catholic are being violated by Obama and you want to vote on my behalf. It's all about what matters to you.
[QUOTE=Adam Wood;529292]and besides;
- even if the disabled 100% were people who would vote for the Democrat no matter what in order to get freebies, they are such a tiny sliver of the population as to be inconsequential. When was the last time that you heard about the all-important wheelchair voting bloc? Overall, the disabled (meaning either people who have some mental disturbance or those who are in a wheelchair or those who have some physical malady that prevents them from working or prevents them from full employment) is about 3% of the population as a whole.
You'd be surprised how much they can do. ADA didn't come out of nowhere. For starters, you don't know what and all is considered a handicap. You don't have to be in a wheelchair. You don't have to be mentally unstable. Legally speaking, they're a bigger group of people than you think. Guess what? They're not all unemployed.
After my rage regarding the healthcare act, I started seeing some changes. For starters, all preventive exams come at no cost. This helps things get caught before they're serious. Flu shots are at no cost if you have health insurance. I'm also looking at friends who can't work, can't get medicaid, and can't get help with charities, and I'm afraid for them. The conservative solution does not work.
I was really torn about the issue until a few months ago. I had voted Republican in 2010 thinking they'd reduce taxes on a state level. They hardly used any of their power for that. In fact, I owed far more last year than ever before on a state level. What the Republicans did do in my state is possibly make it harder to get on healthcare with their ridiculous Amendment One act. People in some counties had domestic benefits. They were able to give benefits to the other person's kids. Now, the argument is that Amendment One won't overturn any of that. We've already seen where people were trying to get rid of domestic benefits. It's funny because domestic benefits doesn't have a thing to do with marriage, but whatever.
The fact that Republicans put that up to a vote and caused all that possible grief is the biggest "screw you" I've ever seen. Democrats did vote for it, but Republican politicians who I voted for set it all in motion. These are the last people I want deciding on healthcare. To me, Amendment One was about so much more than gay rights. It was about healthcare too. I will never forget what the Republican politicians in this state have put people through or attempted to put them through in some cases. What happens the next few days? Romney (who is historically for gay rights) suddenly claims he wants to make sure gays can't get any domestic benefits (i.e. no civil unions). You say your side is for limited government, but I don't see that at all. I especially don't see it on my state. It's a state where gays have no rights, the definition of domestic violence is now under question, and we're still heavily taxed. This place is a libertarian's nightmare (not that I'm libertarian).
I can't trust Republican politicians on a state level. Why would I trust them on a federal level? It really comes down to trust. I don't trust Romney. I don't trust him to do fair taxes. I don't trust him to ensure that women get their pills covered under insurance that they pay for it, not free. I don't even trust Romney to stand by his conservative campaign because of his voting record. Who is Mitt Romney? I don't know.
BTW, did you know I voted for a Republican criminal as my sheriff and that a big chunk of the mostly Republican county tried to vote him back in years later? That's why NC passed a law saying convicts can't run. They shouldn't have had to do that. Adam, some of these Republicans here have no shame, none at all. I realize that's not fair to you all, but when I think of conservative, I'll always think of my surroundings. It's like asking a conservative in Berkeley to have an open mind. It's hard to do after a while when people just have no shame. Not to mention I had an open mind and I think we got burned for it.