Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » mwalker » Archives Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
mwalker's Journal - Archives
Posted by mwalker in General Discussion
Wed Jul 27th 2011, 01:44 AM
A little more than a week ago I crashed a hang glider. It scared the crap out of me but I walked away from it. However, there was major damage done to one shoulder and I have surgery in just over a day to take care of it. I have insurance which is covering that, but I do have to pay a hefty fee for the overnight stay. That's ok, I can cover it.

What about all the people in this country who can't? What about all of them who don't have the insurance or couldn't cover the part that insurance doesn't cover? Nobody got surgery for millions of years but now some of us do. Now I do. But what about them? What happens to them?

I got through school and got a job. What about those who didn't, or couldn't? Maybe just by the luck of who they were born to or where they grew up, they didn't have the opportunities I had or didn't know they had them. Maybe they didn't have the same skills as me. But maybe they have other skills, other abilities. It's not too hard to imagine that, but those skills don't get them what I have. Maybe they don't have skills for whatever reason, but they're just doing the best they can, working through each day to the best of their abilities. Maybe they have a family to feed but not a boss that will tell them to sit the fuck down and get better. Or can't. Why don't they get what I've got? What's wrong with them, or what's so special about me?

In this country, people get the care they need. Some people. The rest, they can pay for that care or the other things those some people get. They get austerity, some people get tax breaks. Some people have skills that are "marketable," but is that our only measure of someone's worth? Is the official religion of the US, the all-mighty dollar, our only way of deciding who gets help and who doesn't?

And who the fuck are Republicans to say that some get help, the rest don't? Who the fuck are they to say the rest didn't want help or care, or that the measly bread crumb thrown to them, which Republicans pared down as much as they could or sent to "some" as tax breaks, were only helping late night comedians? Who the fuck are they to say the rest are all going to suffer a lot more unless the rest of those bread crumbs are taken away?

So, I'm lucky, but austerity will creep its way up to be next. But these are the "death panels," with their shiny new talking points and lofty rhetoric that amounts to what "some" deserve, after the shine rubs off. It's up to the rest of us to cut THEM.
Read entry | Discuss (8 comments)
Posted by mwalker in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Mon Jul 09th 2007, 01:21 AM
I see that there is a post on the greatest page saying, basically, that if people want to support Sheehan's run as an independent against Pelosi, they should take it off DU. While I understand the rules of this forum, and I think I understand the feelings of the poster, I must respectfully disagree.

The main reason is that I can't blindly follow anybody, with respect to politics. We on DU are often making comments about the people who still blindly support Bush and the republicans, regardless of what information comes out about them - where they've screwed up on Iraq, shouldn't have been there in the first place, used the constitution of the U.S. as kindling for an explosion, etc. To still support Bush after everything is insane. The damage done to this country by him and his people will even affect the rich.

By the same token, I can not and will not place blind trust in democrats. But it goes beyond that: the democrats asking to be elected or reelected have to show support for the things I believe we need to do. Pelosi has a record that I have to take into account. She has to do more than just say we should end the war in her campaign speeches. Action is required. If she doesn't follow through on that, I'll consider the alternatives (and I do live in CA).

Let's take the issue of impeachment. I can understand why Pelosi and other politicians would want to take things slowly, build up a really good case, and not start out with impeachment. I support all the hearings and investigations. I can see how many people including myself would want action, not more talk, and how it could be wrong to immediately start impeachment proceedings. However, the evidence against Bush and the administration is so overwhelming, at least from my point of view, that to say something like "impeachment is off the table" is incredible, and ultimately unforgivable. To allow blatant disregard for the highest laws of the land - the constitution, specifically with regard to wiretapping - is to say it's ok, to give approval, to give the American people a big middle finger when all is said and done. Pelosi also recently said that Bush "is not worth impeaching." So authorizing wiretapping, torture, obstruction of justice in terms of the Plame leak, and denial of justice in terms of the US attorney firings, is not worth doing something about? These things and other fundamentally change this country in that they say you can break laws if it's for the right political party.

In Iraq, the figure of 650,000 people killed is 1/10th the number that Hitler killed. That's within an order of magnitude of, arguably, the most evil person known to the modern world. What does it take for someone to realize that by not acting against the person causing this crime to be committed, that they are at least inactively supporting him? And what are we killing these people for? It's hard to deny that the overall reason is likely so that Bush's friends can make a lot of money off of Iraq's oil. It fits with a lot of the other stuff Bush has done - helping his friends at the expense of anyone else.

How in the holy <you know what expletive to insert here> can anyone in power say no, this person is not worth impeaching? How can they say it's "off the table"? I for one will not be like that 26% who use faith-based politics, ignoring all the facts before their eyes to support the man with the right label - R. I will not vote on a brand name. That means that I may vote for an independent, or even a republican if they support the things that I think are right. By not giving the D's a blank check, I give them instead the responsibility to do the right thing.

-mwalker
Read entry | Discuss (78 comments)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.