![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsI hate tweetstorms. I'm too wordy for it. So let me expand on this:
Rothman's contention is that, somehow, the Democrats have managed to coerce the GOP into a situation where the latter cannot admit that it's real, "principled" stance is that the goverment cannot and should not provide universal health care.
Let's consider the argument against "cannot" as a given. Arguing out of ignorance is no excuse.
The "should not" is different. In 1986, Reagan pushed for, and Congress passed, The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). It did this not out of love for America's citizens, but out of shame. As cable news spread, a spate of news articles throughout Reagan's administration highlighted a phenomenon that had only once been a local issue: people dying in hospital parking lots, unable to pay. White people. White women giving birth in the back of cars in hospital parking lots, and then dying of completely treatable complications. The EMTALA exists because it was shameful to see in this, the greatest nation on Earth, the wealthiest nation on Earth, our ordinary citizens dying with an "Emergency Room" sign in the background.
The problem the GOP has is that, if they took Rothman at his word, we'd go back to that. We'd go back to people dying in hospital parking lots. Instead, what we have now is a weird, artificial distinction between acute and chronic conditions. Right now, they're perfectly happy to let people die where no camera is watching.
We have cameras everywhere. People are still dying of completely treatable causes, and now they're taking selfies of themselves as it happens.
Rothman's case is an absolute one: America should embrace the vision of people dying in parking lots as a sign of America's real moral value: If you're not rich, or can't demonstrate an ongoing return on investment to the rich, you may as well just die.
I really don't understand why the GOP can't just come out and say that.
That's funny... you just did. How did you ever manage without the liberal viking ninja samurai finding you? https://t.co/7nQQRDiiaU
— Eλf Sternberg (@elfsternberg) March 12, 2017
Rothman's contention is that, somehow, the Democrats have managed to coerce the GOP into a situation where the latter cannot admit that it's real, "principled" stance is that the goverment cannot and should not provide universal health care.
Let's consider the argument against "cannot" as a given. Arguing out of ignorance is no excuse.
The "should not" is different. In 1986, Reagan pushed for, and Congress passed, The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). It did this not out of love for America's citizens, but out of shame. As cable news spread, a spate of news articles throughout Reagan's administration highlighted a phenomenon that had only once been a local issue: people dying in hospital parking lots, unable to pay. White people. White women giving birth in the back of cars in hospital parking lots, and then dying of completely treatable complications. The EMTALA exists because it was shameful to see in this, the greatest nation on Earth, the wealthiest nation on Earth, our ordinary citizens dying with an "Emergency Room" sign in the background.
The problem the GOP has is that, if they took Rothman at his word, we'd go back to that. We'd go back to people dying in hospital parking lots. Instead, what we have now is a weird, artificial distinction between acute and chronic conditions. Right now, they're perfectly happy to let people die where no camera is watching.
We have cameras everywhere. People are still dying of completely treatable causes, and now they're taking selfies of themselves as it happens.
Rothman's case is an absolute one: America should embrace the vision of people dying in parking lots as a sign of America's real moral value: If you're not rich, or can't demonstrate an ongoing return on investment to the rich, you may as well just die.
I really don't understand why the GOP can't just come out and say that.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2017-03-12 07:28 pm (UTC)"ButButBut ... If you-all have universal healthcare, then the wrong people might be eligible for it, and spend all your tax dollars on
negro musicdialysis!!!1!!ELEVENTY!!!!" (Dog whistle fades into near-inaudibility).no subject
Date: 2017-03-13 03:25 am (UTC)We hafta do it for them, is the only catch. That's okay, we were making signs anyway, and putting a big ol' "GOP FAMILY VALUES" on a picture of a preventable corpse and her newly orphaned children looking on in horror, well that's just one more sign. we need to show it to the right people. Not the politicians, gods no, we KNOW they don't give a fig.
Show it to These people: http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/In-a-place-of-need-an-unhealthy-contradiction-10995299.php
There are two ways to craft the needed message:
The Wrong Way is to share the correct but Completely Unpalatable Conclusion that these poor, rural families were WRONG, and made a WRONG choice. Nobody likes that, it turns off your audience and looses them.
The Right Way is to ride on a well-trod path, instead; Rural, Impoverished communities of every color and stripe from New England down to New Mexico can all agree: They Get Screwed Over All The Time. "Sorry, Buddy, You Got Had." is a MUCH EASIER SELL. Especially if you have any way to follow up and bridge the gap between Now and Next Election with whatever these folks need most.