During GOP Debate, when RP asked about sick young man audience yells "Let him DIE!".


DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ BITCH?


Medical bills underlie 60 percent of U.S. bankrupts: study | Reuters

THE GIST BECAUSE YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON.

States that medical is an underling cause, in other words they had medical bills that contributed. Do you understand the difference between cause and contribution.

you stupid bitch!!!!

:lol:

The bread winner in a family gets a critical illness..so not only is there a loss of income but medical bills.

It's a double whammy.

No wonder you people applaud the death penalty and blurt out that uninsured people should die.
 
Good grief...some tosser in the audience yelled out something stupid.........................that's all..............................nothing to see here...........................!!!
How many "passes" do Teabaggers deserve, regarding such stupid-remarks?????

:eusa_eh:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL39we_Yijw]Special Comment - McCain Incites "Kill Him" Again - YouTube[/ame]​
 
the true colors of the gop and their thinking...simple as that

yeah, damn those people for thinking People SHOULD TAKE CARE OF themselves.


you realize most bankruptcies are due to medical bills?

i hope you live to be a rich woman and still cant pay your medical bills

you do realize insurances do turn down people etc?

but dont concerned yourself with that
Remember all that craziness about death panels?

The real death panel advocates are the teapees.
 

DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ BITCH?


Medical bills underlie 60 percent of U.S. bankrupts: study | Reuters

THE GIST BECAUSE YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON.

States that medical is an underling cause, in other words they had medical bills that contributed. Do you understand the difference between cause and contribution.

you stupid bitch!!!!

:lol:

The bread winner in a family gets a critical illness..so not only is there a loss of income but medical bills.

It's a double whammy.

No wonder you people applaud the death penalty and blurt out that uninsured people should die.

Dont play stupid....

I challenged that most bankruptcies are due to medical. Although it is an underlying contribution to 60% it is not the cause.

Will you turn into a little bitch too, or can you debate properly?
 

DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ BITCH?


Medical bills underlie 60 percent of U.S. bankrupts: study | Reuters

THE GIST BECAUSE YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON.

States that medical is an underling cause, in other words they had medical bills that contributed. Do you understand the difference between cause and contribution.

you stupid bitch!!!!

:lol:

The bread winner in a family gets a critical illness..so not only is there a loss of income but medical bills.

It's a double whammy.

No wonder you people applaud the death penalty and blurt out that uninsured people should die.

Considering the premise of the question was a 30yr old who could afford it, but chose not to, I'd say he was a very irresponsible individual to not look out for his family.
JMO, but then again, I don't believe you can hold folks hand to make them responsible.
 
debate properly....i havent see a fact in any of your posts....or a link to prove what you are saying....

you are just a little boy with emotes
 
even with insurance you have 20% to pay normally.....left a friend with over a million dollars to pay...she had great insurance and two bouts of cancer
 
You all go on about the cheering on this video....i watched the debates, because i do plan on voting for whatever "conservative" makes the republican ticket. EXCEPT if it's Ron Paul....then I most likely won't vote for either one of them because if my choice is between him or obama, i want neither one. When this question was asked, i was very surprised to hear the cheering in the crowd, then really hated his answer! Everyone knows something has to be done about insurance, but obamacare is not the answer and i don't believe in letting someone die just because they don't have insurance....i wouldn't want that done to any of my family and nobody would.

I wish that question had been put to all of them because with the way Paul fumbled around with his answer i KNEW this would be the big discussion here today! So just because of his answer all you lefties just decide they ALL would have said the same thing?? If any of you have paid any attention to Paul, he's not anything like the others and i think alot of his ideas are nuts!

Besides...do you really think if a 30 year old went into the emergency room and was in such a shape to know he's going to die without care immediately that the hospital is going to try to find out if he had insurance before they do anything to save his life? Maybe he was in a car accident, by himself, nobody else there to talk to the doctors....and they're going to wait until they can find family before they take care of him? I don't think any hospital would do that. Besides, there's alot of people WITH insurance that don't pay their medical bills. Insurance doesn't pay the entire bill...you have a co-pay and sometimes those co-pays are quite high if they're admitted to the hospital. I know several people that don't have the money to pay that and have medical bills in collection because of it.

also adding....I want to make it clear though that it's not up to ME to cover that 30 yr old's hospital bill and he should be made to pay for it somehow (maybe ALOT of community service??) But that would be his choice since he didn't get insurance when he could have.
 
Last edited:
Pure distortion......The premise thrown at Ron Paul was a working 30 year old who made a conscious decision to not provide for his own well being and finds himself in a critical care situation.

Not my problem.

Totally agree.

Those who want to support those who can't pay for themselves can start their own charity.

They can whip out THIER WALLETS AND THIER CHECKBOOKS and pay away. Believe me they will be in the poorhouse before they know it.

Looks like your in the let them die camp

Nope. I'm in they aren't my responsibility, not my problem camp.

However TDM if you and all likeminded are so concerned and want to pay their way then feel free.

Start your own charity.

Open your wallets and whip our your checkbooks. Believe me they will be standing in line to take any and all that you want to provide.
 
He circled around the question too. At first Ron was agreeing that he should die then he gets on a rant where he says churches should pay..

He wasn't agreeing he should die. The implied question is whether government is the proper tool to care for him.

This is something that is a real hang up for liberals when considering the libertarian argument. When you hear libertarians say that we shouldn't use government to take care of the poor, you assume we think society has no responsibility to care for those who fall through the cracks, and that's simply not true. Despite the crackpot in the audience of the debate, libertarians believe in community, believe in charity, believe in helping out those in need. We just reject the common assumption that government is a good way to achieve those goals.
 
Totally agree.

Those who want to support those who can't pay for themselves can start their own charity.

They can whip out THIER WALLETS AND THIER CHECKBOOKS and pay away. Believe me they will be in the poorhouse before they know it.

Looks like your in the let them die camp

Nope. I'm in they aren't my responsibility, not my problem camp.

However TDM if you and all likeminded are so concerned and want to pay their way then feel free.

Start your own charity.

Open your wallets and whip our your checkbooks. Believe me they will be standing in line to take any and all that you want to provide.

That IS the let them die camp silly
 
Hi, you have received -729 reputation points from strollingbones.
Reputation was given for this post.

Even though I caught her lying.

then the sleazy bitch ravi.

Hi, you have received -737 reputation points from Ravi.
Reputation was given for this post.


The difference here folks is they can not out debate the facts.
 
the 30 year old decided he did not want nor did he need insurance, it's called personal responsibility, but no, the GOP doesn't want him to just die and any libtard who says otherwise is just flat out a liar. We'd like to put his ass in jail for stupidity when he gets well and make him work off his bill. It still doesn't justify "mandating" that someone buy health insurance.


ya'll libtrards suck the hind tit.
 
DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ BITCH?


Medical bills underlie 60 percent of U.S. bankrupts: study | Reuters

THE GIST BECAUSE YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON.

States that medical is an underling cause, in other words they had medical bills that contributed. Do you understand the difference between cause and contribution.

you stupid bitch!!!!

:lol:

The bread winner in a family gets a critical illness..so not only is there a loss of income but medical bills.

It's a double whammy.

No wonder you people applaud the death penalty and blurt out that uninsured people should die.

Considering the premise of the question was a 30yr old who could afford it, but chose not to, I'd say he was a very irresponsible individual to not look out for his family.
JMO, but then again, I don't believe you can hold folks hand to make them responsible.

I was 30, once. Big strong and extremely healthy.

Worked on a truck and moved furniture. I didn't need no stinking health insurance.

Now I am 50. About 10 years ago I had a severe heart problem that required something called an "ablation". Very long, expensive and painful operation. And I am glad I had health insurance.
 
What I find humorous is that many that would say that the man should be left to die are ones who also choose to go without health insurance. I agree that if you choose to go without insurance and do so knowing you can afford it, then you probably shouldn't receive medical care that you can't pay for. The problem is that most people that go without insurance are ones who truly can't afford it.
.....sometimes!!!!!!

BILL MOYERS: And they do what to make sure that they keep diminishing the medical loss ratio?

WENDELL POTTER: Rescission is one thing. Denying claims is another. Being, you know, really careful as they review claims, particularly for things like liver transplants, to make sure, from their point of view, that it really is medically necessary and not experimental. That's one thing. And that was that issue in the Nataline Sarkisyan case.

But another way is to purge employer accounts, that-- if a small business has an employee, for example, who suddenly has have a lot of treatment, or is in an accident. And medical bills are piling up, and this employee is filing claims with the insurance company. That'll be noticed by the insurance company.

And when that business is up for renewal, and it typically is up, once a year, up for renewal, the underwriters will look at that. And they'll say, "We need to jack up the rates here, because the experience was," when I say experience, the claim experience, the number of claims filed was more than we anticipated. So we need to jack up the price. Jack up the premiums. Often they'll do this, knowing that the employer will have no alternative but to leave. And that happens all the time.

They'll resort to things like the rescissions that we saw earlier. Or dumping, actually dumping employer groups from the rolls. So the more of my premium that goes to my health claims, pays for my medical coverage, the less money the company makes."


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QwX_soZ1GI]BILL MOYERS JOURNAL | Wendell Potter | PBS - YouTube[/ame]
*

*

*
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Forum List

Back
Top