Eric Cantor and Republican "compassion"
By Michael J.W. Stickings
According to Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), if you're sick (even seriously sick, like with cancer) and don't have insurance, you should either look for "an existing government program" or beg for charity.
This is what passes for Republican "compassion" these days.
You're sick? Tough luck.
**********
"No one in this country, given who we are, should be sitting without an option to be addressed," he added.
Yes, but existing government programs and "charitable organizations" aren't viable options for most people. When you're sick, and even when you're healthy and trying to prevent sickness, what you need is an option guaranteeing care -- yes, a public option that is either (and preferably) universal or that provides insurance coverage where private options don't.
When you're sick, you want to know that the care is there for you no matter what and that you can focus on getting healthy, and that you can be as comfortable as possible no matter how serious your sickness.
What you certainly don't need is the worry that comes with not having coverage to begin with, with your life possibly turned upside down as you struggle to find whatever care might luckily come your way.
Indeed, when you're sick, you certainly don't want to have to apply to a government program or to beg for charity, in either case being required to make your case for treatment and care.
It's not just unrealistic to think that these are viable options, it's cruel to oppose, as Republicans do, Cantor included, any serious reform to a system that keeps so many people, tens of millions of them, on the outside looking in, with little to no hope of getting the treatment and care they so desperately need.
According to Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), if you're sick (even seriously sick, like with cancer) and don't have insurance, you should either look for "an existing government program" or beg for charity.
This is what passes for Republican "compassion" these days.
You're sick? Tough luck.
**********
"No one in this country, given who we are, should be sitting without an option to be addressed," he added.
Yes, but existing government programs and "charitable organizations" aren't viable options for most people. When you're sick, and even when you're healthy and trying to prevent sickness, what you need is an option guaranteeing care -- yes, a public option that is either (and preferably) universal or that provides insurance coverage where private options don't.
When you're sick, you want to know that the care is there for you no matter what and that you can focus on getting healthy, and that you can be as comfortable as possible no matter how serious your sickness.
What you certainly don't need is the worry that comes with not having coverage to begin with, with your life possibly turned upside down as you struggle to find whatever care might luckily come your way.
Indeed, when you're sick, you certainly don't want to have to apply to a government program or to beg for charity, in either case being required to make your case for treatment and care.
It's not just unrealistic to think that these are viable options, it's cruel to oppose, as Republicans do, Cantor included, any serious reform to a system that keeps so many people, tens of millions of them, on the outside looking in, with little to no hope of getting the treatment and care they so desperately need.
Labels: Eric Cantor, health care, health-care reform, Republicans
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
12:15 PM
1 Comments:
Its funny you attack him, since his advice mirrors many of the ideas and advice posted on the American Cancer Society page:
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/HOME/pff/PFF_5_1_How_Will_I_Pay_for_all_This.asp?sitearea=PFF
By
Anonymous, at 5:20 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home