Tag: go die in the streets

Things To Come

 I think a lot of people have no idea what enforcement of abortion laws is going to look like between modern surveillance technology and the War on Drugs mindset. It’s the ideal American form of reactionary governance from time immemorial: a state that is incredibly intrusive in day-to-day life while providing few benefits.

Scott Lemieux, writing for Lawyers, Guns, and Money

This is a key point that seems to be largely unspoken in the wider media complex. Take a state like Texas and then remove Roe. Laws are already in place to ban all abortions. But I think everyone stops here and talks about how bad that would be for people with no resources to, say, fly to Massachusetts for an abortion.

The folks in charge of Texas, of course, have already thought of this. Their vigilante-based law already provides rewards for turning in your neighbor or co-worker who sneaks off to get an abortion. But why stop there? Medical abortion is safe and available. So Texas (and the other red states) will need to monitor the mail, internet searches, connections to specific websites where one might do a consult online; all of it. Same goes for crossing the border and getting the pills in Mexico; it’s all but guaranteed they’re going to clamp down harder on mifepristone than meth. I’d expect that, before too long, women traveling for any reason will begin to face enhanced questioning and scrutiny if they’re going someplace suspicious. Did you get a permission for travel form signed by your husband, Ma’am? Could we see some proof of your meeting registration in Boston? Why are you trying to drive out of Texas? We’re going to need to draw a little blood…

As if that’s not enough, then we get to the “just like an abortion” issue. That’s how these folks now in charge of our legal system define many contraceptives. Turns out that IUDs, Plan B, the regular old pill, and many other common forms of contraception are, in fact, considered abortifacients by the far right who now control the Supreme Court and govern red states across the land. If we’re lucky, married couples will still be able to access condoms in the red states of the near future, though probably not for long the way we’re currently going.

Lastly, can we file the “lets get together and maintain some “popularist” level of regulated access to abortion legislatively” nonsense in the “Tip and Ronnie working into the evenings to hammer out sensible compromises” Drawer of Centrist Fantasies? You could pass such a bill by a collective 535-0 tomorrow and within about six hours it would be struck down by a Trump judge and promptly 5-4’d by the Supreme Court; they might not even bother to hear it. There will be no plausible way (short of amending the Constitution, and I don’t consider that approach plausible) to pass any legislation guaranteeing a right to abortion in this country that will survive judicial “review.” These people don’t give a fuck and will contort their legislative “reasoning” into whatever non-Euclidean shape that is required to back-solve for “strike this down.” Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn’t been paying attention and should not be paid attention to.

The Center for American Progress helpfully worked through a few common preexisting conditions among, oh, all of them that will be newly surcharged should the AHCA pass. I think my favorite is completed pregnanct with no or minor complications; that’ll be an additional $17,060 atop your existing fees. Makes perfect sense to me.

The GOP’s health care plan is and always has been: sick individuals should endure bankruptcy for themselves and their families and then, when the money’s gone, kindly go die in the streets. If you don’t have the money to go bankrupt keeping yourself alive in the first place, then don’t get sick (because people who live a good life just don’t get sick) or just go die in the streets. Period.

And, of course, who is not subject to these exciting new ideas? That’d be Congress. I’ve said it before and will say it again: Congress and their dependents should be automatically enrolled the lowest coverage health care allowable by law with no recourse to outside insurance and no Congressional Clinic with 24/7 full service walk-in care for ~$500/year either. Such a law could be about two sentences long (which seems to be the limit for the GOP’s attention) and would greatly clarify these debates.

I was struck last night by a comment that I heard made by Speaker Ryan, where he called this [Affordable Care Act] repeal bill ‘an act of mercy.’ With all due respect to our speaker, he and I must have read different Scripture…The one I read calls on us to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to shelter the homeless, and to comfort the sick. It reminds us that we are judged not by how we treat the powerful, but by how we care for the least among us. There is no mercy in a system that makes health care a luxury. There is no mercy in a country that turns their back on those most in need of protection: the elderly, the poor, the sick, and the suffering. There is no mercy in a cold shoulder to the mentally ill. This is not an act of mercy. It is an act of malice.

Joe Kennedy III (D. MA) doing it the right way

So why do Republicans hate Obamacare so much? It’s not because they have better ideas; as we’ve seen over the past few weeks, they’re coming up empty-handed on the “replace” part of “repeal and replace.” It’s not, I’m sorry to say, because they are deeply committed to Americans’ right to buy the insurance policy of their choice.

No, mainly they hate Obamacare for two reasons: It demonstrates that the government can make people’s lives better, and it’s paid for in large part with taxes on the wealthy. Their overriding goal is to make those taxes go away. And if getting those taxes cut means that quite a few people end up dying, remember: freedom!

Paul Krugman, writing in the Times of New York. I’d only quibble with the “over the past few weeks, they’re coming up empty handed” part. The GOP has had YEARS to come up with a plan. They haven’t. In fact, they haven’t even produced so much as a meaningful tweak, much less full replacment. Their plan is that anyone who can’t pay or exhausts their tax sheltered Health Savings Account should kindly go die in the streets. Period. Just how big should that HSA get? I guess that depends on how sick you plan on being or the level to which you are prepared to shop around during your heart attack.

There was a time in this country – and many voters in places like Indiana and Michigan and Pennsylvania are old enough to remember it – when business leaders felt a patriotic responsibility to protect American jobs and communities. Mitt Romney’s father, George, was such a leader, deeply concerned about the city of Detroit, where he built AMC cars.

But his son Mitt wasn’t. That sense of noblesse oblige disappeared somewhere during the past generation, when the newly global employer class cut regular working stiffs loose, forcing them to compete with billions of foreigners without rights or political power who would eat toxic waste for five cents a day.

Then they hired politicians and intellectuals to sell the peasants in places like America on why this was the natural order of things. Unfortunately, the only people fit for this kind of work were mean, traitorous scum, the kind of people who in the military are always eventually bayoneted by their own troops. This is what happened to the Republicans, and even though the cost was a potential Trump presidency, man, was it something to watch.

If this isn’t the end for the Republican Party, it’ll be a shame. They dominated American political life for 50 years and were never anything but monsters. They bred in their voters the incredible attitude that Republicans were the only people within our borders who raised children, loved their country, died in battle or paid taxes. They even sullied the word “American” by insisting they were the only real ones. They preferred Lubbock to Paris, and their idea of an intellectual was Newt Gingrich. Their leaders, from Ralph Reed to Bill Frist to Tom DeLay to Rick Santorum to Romney and Ryan, were an interminable assembly line of shrieking, witch-hunting celibates, all with the same haircut – the kind of people who thought Iran-Contra was nothing, but would grind the affairs of state to a halt over a blow job or Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube.

A century ago, the small-town American was Gary Cooper: tough, silent, upright and confident. The modern Republican Party changed that person into a haranguing neurotic who couldn’t make it through a dinner without quizzing you about your politics. They destroyed the American character. No hell is hot enough for them. And when Trump came along, they rolled over like the weaklings they’ve always been, bowing more or less instantly to his parodic show of strength.

Matt Taibbi nails it. Read the whole thing

How long has [the VA] been a problem? Decades. How long have politicians been talking about it? Decades.” Fiorina said she would gather 10 or 12 veterans in a room, including the gentleman from the third row, and ask what they want. Fiorina would then vet this plan via telephone poll, asking Americans to “press one for yes on your smartphone, two for no. You know how to solve these problems, so I’m going to ask you.

Carly Fiorina, wowing us with The Leadership. Rising star, everyone. Deepest GOP bench in a generation or more. To lower taxes, press one!

There Is No GOP Budget Proposal

Can we please at least agree that vaguely worded letters sent to the President do not constitute a legislative proposal? Or did the CBO start scoring letters that are 90% vacuous talking points; add to that the fact that these very empty talking points were soundly crushed by plebiscite just weeks ago?

Likewise, slightly less vague details provided on background do not a serious proposal make. These details are provided on background precisely so they may be disavowed at any moment. This is not “Boehner’s Proposal.” It is bullshit. But, even then, the GOP proposes extracting from the backs of the poor, elderly, and infirm a dollar value less than half of what Obama attains by slightly inconveniencing the very rich. Apparently this fact was not worth noting, background or otherwise.

Our media entertainment complex finds none of this worth noting. Math is hard and so very boring, but can’t we at least admit the vacuity and shady sourcing of this “plan” when reporting it? Apparently not.

Obama ignored vast swaths of his agenda [while campaigning], barely mentioning climate change or education reform, but by God did he hammer home the fact that his winning would bring higher taxes on the rich. He raised it so relentlessly that at times it seemed out of proportion even to me, and I wrote a book on the topic. But polls consistently showed the public was on his side.

Jonathan Chait, who may as well be yelling at the clouds because, even though he’s right, it seems the forces of the status quo (MSM and GOP alike) can and will move heaven and earth if need be to preserve the current Bush-Obama tax cut rate for the very richest ~2% of Americans rather than simply revert to current law and let those rates on income above $250k move up by (gasp) ~2.5% to the Clinton era rates. Far better to memory hole all that Romney/Obama debating, claim the election was shockingly “idea free,” that nearly 4M extra popular voters and 332 electoral votes isn’t a mandate, and demand the ever-popular grand bargain, which, if course, is only grand or a bargain for the wealthiest 2% of Americans, many or most of whom likely did not vote for Obama. The rest of you: go die in the streets.
Source: New York Magazine