Archive for fuck the poor and hungry

"What we are witnessing are the death throes of the anti-Obamacare crowd."

Share

obamacare is winning, anti-obamacare fight

My favorite columnist at the Los Angeles Times, Michael Hiltzik (scroll), has written another excellent piece, this time covering anti-Obamacare Republicans and their deadly and perplexing fight against Medicaid expansion.

Here is what Medicaid could do to keep the neediest Americans alive and well:

The final battle of the war over the Affordable Care Act is being waged today over expanding Medicaid. As the act was originally conceived, Medicaid would provide healthcare for more than 10 million of the poorest uninsured Americans, most of them childless adults with earnings up to 138% of the federal poverty level. (This year, that income ceiling is about $16,000.)

But then along came the Roberts Supreme Court to make Medicaid expansion voluntary, aiding and abetting GOP-run states in their quest to destroy all things President Obama. This "amazes and frustrates health experts. That's especially so because the federal government covers 100% of the cost of expansion through 2016. After that, the federal share will slowly decline to 90% in 2020 and beyond."

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth:

What's most curious about states with Republican leaders ostensibly devoted to fiscal responsibility is that shunning Medicaid expansion makes no budgetary sense, given the huge federal financial commitment and the potential for reducing other state costs, including the public cost of treating uninsured patients.

Hiltzik goes into detail about how various states are handling health care coverage. At the end of his piece, he confirms what many of us have observed over the past few months-- that those self-professed "pro-life" Repeal, Repeal, Repealers are fighting a futile war and are losing.

But their fight is costing lives: Their own political lives, and sadly, the lives of those who need a helping hand in order to survive:

What we are witnessing are the death throes of the anti-Obamacare crowd. Expanded access to health coverage is here to stay. The GOP's resistance to expanding Medicaid has merely turned 5 million Americans into refugees from ideological warfare, awaiting the moment when peace offers them a chance at better health.

Share

Hey WI Gov. Scott Walker, explain what will happen to 77,000 parents forced off Medicaid. #Obamacare

Share

family values my ass

Hey Gov. Walker, it was your choice to to have the federal government run Wisconsin's health care exchange.

Speaking of which, how nice that you allow yourself the freedom of choice, but you refuse to make that option available to women who seek health care services, including abortion. In fact, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald says, ""We have a pro-life majority in the state Senate right now, and because of that there's always a willingness to work on" anti-abortion legislation, which caused one Wisconsin state Dem senator to expect "all out hell."

But I digress.

So Scotty, explain to all those families exactly what contingency plans you have if Obamacare enrollment is still glitchy, or if the federal government makes your plan impossible to implement. 77,000-plus inquiring minds want to know.

Because, see, there's a time gap that will affect people who will lose their BadgerCare (Medicaid) eligibility but would then have to meet the deadline to enroll in the Affordable Care Act via the marketplace.

How's that GOP outreach thing workin' for ya, Scotty?

Via PostCrescent.com:

Wisconsin health care advocates want Gov. Scott Walker to say what will happen with 77,000 adults being shifted off Medicaid in January if they are not able to get coverage through the new health insurance exchange in time. [...]

In late September, the state notified 77,000 people, most of them parents, that they might be affected. But letters letting people know for sure won’t be sent until Nov. 23, when the state expects to be ready to use new federal criteria to determine eligibility. [...]

In late September, the state notified 77,000 people, most of them parents, that they might be affected. But letters letting people know for sure won’t be sent until Nov. 23, when the state expects to be ready to use new federal criteria to determine eligibility.

Just in time for the holidays! Which party is waging a "War on Christmas" again?

Via .ecobumperstickers.com

Share

What I will not write about today

Share

frustrated32

Sometimes I get so frustrated and/or disheartened and/or annoyed by some of the news stories of the day that I can’t bring myself to write about them. Here are a few recent reports that made my blood pressure hit the roof. I am avoiding delving into them at length out of concern for my physical and mental health.

See what I mean? So who’s up for a couple of Margs or a trough of wine?

drunk license place CA

Share

Banishing the Poor, Unemployed and Working Class from the Mainstream Media Implies That They are Worthless

Share

media news incorporated democracy

Your Daily Dose of BuzzFlash at Truthout, via my pal Mark Karlin;

How often do you come across an article or a television news story that presents a poor person in a positive light?  Or for that matter when do you read about or see a story on an unemployed individual or the challenges of a working class American whose salary is receding as the stock market soars? [...]

In short, if you are not a member of the economically made, political or corporate elite, you generally don't appear in the news. You are voiceless, faceless. The reality is that you are not news; your existence is hardly worthy of note, with the obligatory exception of an occasional "gee it's tough to live like this" profile of a "welfare mom" or person unemployed and looking for work for three or four years. [...]

Otherwise, in urban areas, the only regular stories you see about the poor is the knife and gun coverage of violence [...]

Some union members are well into the middle class, but even labor gets short shrift by the corporate mainstream media.  Why? Many reasons, but one of the big ones is that the owners of news "machines" in America are generally not keen on unions.  They cut into their media conglomerate profits.  So why promote the union viewpoint?

But there's another key point to remember.  News that relies on advertising for revenue and profit – which is almost all the news media ...– are shaped as conduits for advertisers to deliver to a defined market.  And guess what? Poor and low income people don't have the money to make them a desirable advertising audience (with some exceptions) for big media. So why write articles about them in the corporate media? [...]

To many in the society, their mere presence on earth blights the landscape of the prosperous.

Please read the entire post here.

Share