Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,301 posts, read 4,416,348 times
Reputation: 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi
Only 4 Republican members of Congress have rejected their health care. I'm shocked Ron Paul has it. Maybe all Republicans are hypocrites after all.
The government has always offered medical care for those who are employed by them. I'm for doing away with personal income tax - but I still pay it. Does that make me a hypocrit?
I voted "NO". They are only taking advantage of a benefit offired by their employer.
The only thing I do find hypocritical is voting against *something* that would make health care available to all when you (the one voting) have such easy access to it. That doesn't mean that I think they should have voted FOR a bill they don't agree with but they need to find a way to get people insured. Period.
No plausible interpretation of the words “general welfare” does not include programs that ensure that all Americans can live their entire lives secure in the understanding that retirement will not force them into poverty and untreated sickness.
From the article^^ , I disagree with this completely.
On one hand, I agree with Rick Perry about what that word means -- "General welfare" is a word with flexible meaning; I always interpreted it to mean "well being", in the vague sense of "what's good for the country." I think it's a perversion to try and say it is referring to the specific sort of "welfare" that constitutes food stamps, or retirement and healthcare systems.
On the other hand, no interpretation of the definition of 'general welfare' makes SS or Medicare or Medicaid "unconstitutional." That's stupid.
Is that really considered public health care/government take-over of health care or is it considered a benefit of having a job with the government? I will admit it's a publicly funded benefit of having a federal job.
In that case, are military men and women who use the health services of the armed forces, but vote TEA Party considered hypocrites too?
confused possibly, uniformed maybe but hypocrites no!
Why? Because although military memembers get "free" healthcare it comes at a price. They cannot sue for medical mistakes, can only get what is available at a specific time frame and depending on the base they may even get very new doctors to care for them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
