Read this for yourself and then say your piece.
28-Year-Old Who Survived Fist-Sized Brain Tumor Just Got an Obamacare Surprise — And It’s Not What She Wanted
2K TheBlaze.com - Stories by Liz Klimas
Being diagnosed with a brain tumor the size of her fist is something Amanda Pratt never thought she would face. At 28 years old, Pratt has had five surgeries to remove the tumor, and though on the road to recovery she faces years of check-ups and treatments to ensure she stays well.
ThatÂ’s already somewhat jarring for young woman. Maybe it should have prepared her for what she saw when she went to the doctor last week. ThatÂ’s where she got another shock: the cost of some of her care now that Obamacare had started taking effect.
Read more @
28-Year-Old Who Survived Fist-Sized Brain Tumor Just Got an Obamacare Surprise ? And It?s Not What She Wanted | TheBlaze.com
I can guess right now, the standard replies:
1. how do you know the insurance and medical costs would have risen anyway, you can't prove that was caused by Obamacare
2. it's the company/employer's fault for lowering the hours to part time
3. if doctors quit or this gets reported, that's just due to misinformation spread
that Obamacare is going to cost more in administration and not pay doctors
and my reply to that
if you weren't going to take financial responsibility for the changes then don't push unproven reforms, then expect other people to trust or to pay the difference
the number one objection I see to all this
is the people pushing it are not paying for the costs
if you believe in it so much, then you should be willing to PAY to support
it WHILE PROVING how well it works, not forcing it by law and then
BLAMING when people complain of problems caused directly or indirectly
saying you can't prove what caused the problems is a copout
reminds me of 3 people conspiring to rob a bank, someone gets shot dead as a result
of the crime, getaway, or fight with police, but they can't tell who did it. So all 3 people go free because there is not enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt "which of the 3" actually caused the death. All 3 are at fault for felony murder if a death occurred in the commission of a crime or as a result.
Who actually fired the deadly shot is after the fact.
The irresponsible and "reckless or malicious disregard for rights of others" ALREADY OCCURRED. the aftermath is further damage of the original misconduct and abuse
Using the lack of evidence as a defense does not excuse the original irresponsible decision to act in such a way that would already "endanger or threaten" people's safety.
When a person is guilty of attempted rape, which already causes harm by threatening to rape, the person's right of security is already infringed upon, whether or not the rape occurs.
So even IMPOSING the threat of raising costs and imposing tax fines or mandates without the consent of the taxpayers ALREADY is abuse;
and discriminating, demeaning, bullying or excluding people's objections and Constitutional beliefs constitutes harassment.
I question, is this going to have to be reframed as CRIMINAL racketeering and conspiracy to violate civil rights
before anyone takes it seriously? that members and leaders of Democrat Party abused public authority and resources
to censor objections and coerce members of the public to submit to policies against our will that violate our civil rights to
freely choose health care and conduct business without unlawful search, seizures, and threats of penalty imposed directly or indirectly caused by govt?
is that what it has to escalate to?
someone dying so this becomes CRIMINAL
