So you probably haven't seen it if you aren't in one of America's precious, coddled Swing States, but a pro-Obama PAC has been running a mean ad featuring a guy who was laid off because Bain Capital made the business he worked for more efficient, and he says that his wife died because they didn't have health insurance because he was laid off because Bain Capital thought that would be a good idea. You might think this is mean and unfair and don't hate the specific corporate player hate the employer-based health-care system game etc., but surely when an ad is going out that basically has a blue-collar dude saying "MITT ROMNEY KILLED MY WIFE" the Romney campaign has to respond somehow, right? Well they did, actually, and they did actually respond with legitimately good advice! This advice was: people who need good health care should move to Massachusetts, because they have universal coverage there, thanks to Governor Romney. Wait, what?
It's similar to how Mitt likes to fire people. Even in context, the word he used is "like". Business owners, when forced by circumstance to fire people, will generally do it -- but not many would tell you they like it.
Where uninsured people are getting their health care, at taxpayer expense. I&#039;ve never quite figured out how doing it the more expensive way makes it <i>not</i> socialized medicine ... but that&#039;s true of most teabagger thinking.
You&#039;ve got the hopeless 30% who will vote for zombie Hitler before voting for Obama, so the real battle is over the 20% or so who haven&#039;t been paying attention.
The Dems and their superPAC supporters should spend as much as possible on voter registration ... it would be great to see people get so pissed off at voter suppression efforts that there&#039;s a net increase in minority/poor voting.
Is it just me, or did Andrea Saul just neatly highlight precisely the reason that States are not <em>able</em> to effectively regulate healthcare by themselves, because savings gained from reforms like Massachusetts&#039; are often more than cancelled out by the inward migration of sick out-of-staters?
I seem to recall that precisely this argument was included in the Supreme Court opinion upholding the ACA.
That, and evil twin, are hard to reconcile. Then again, Republican platform...
It&#039;s just a matter of figuring out the algorithm behind his RND function.
&quot;Conthequences, schmonthequences --- ath long ath I&#039;m rich!!!&quot;
There&#039;s the moral compass of the Millionaires for Mitt.
It&#039;s similar to how Mitt likes to fire people. Even in context, the word he used is &quot;like&quot;. Business owners, when forced by circumstance to fire people, will generally do it -- but not many would tell you they like it.
Where uninsured people are getting their health care, at taxpayer expense. I&#039;ve never quite figured out how doing it the more expensive way makes it <i>not</i> socialized medicine ... but that&#039;s true of most teabagger thinking.
You&#039;ve got the hopeless 30% who will vote for zombie Hitler before voting for Obama, so the real battle is over the 20% or so who haven&#039;t been paying attention.
The Dems and their superPAC supporters should spend as much as possible on voter registration ... it would be great to see people get so pissed off at voter suppression efforts that there&#039;s a net increase in minority/poor voting.
Is it just me, or did Andrea Saul just neatly highlight precisely the reason that States are not <em>able</em> to effectively regulate healthcare by themselves, because savings gained from reforms like Massachusetts&#039; are often more than cancelled out by the inward migration of sick out-of-staters?
I seem to recall that precisely this argument was included in the Supreme Court opinion upholding the ACA.
Not with Bugs, but still prolly my all time fav w/DD and his bill follies:
<a href="http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch\?v=8cuihrjLNAo" target="_blank">&quot;Ho! Ha ha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!&quot; </a>
You gotta remember, it&#039;s targeted at the dumbasses who are considering voting for Mitt.
so just how many people can you fit in Massachusetts anyway?