Coffee Table
What's on your mind? What should we be talking about right now. Grab a cup and let's talk. Click the comments and go for it!
posted by Ron at 12:34 AM
Real America
The only thing we have to fear is fear its self. Nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
Previous Posts
- The Leg Bone Connects To The Thigh Bone
- It's A Brave New World
- Brains Turned To Mush
- The Liberal Media Doesn't Want You To Know This
- American Taliban
- My Goodness Marge That's Despicable !
- Future Issues In Sports
- Religion And Politics
- Coffee Table.
- Returning
About Me
- Name: Ron
- Location: Roswell, New Mexico, United States
A radio broadcast veteran, a father of 2, a son, a brother,a friend and a child of God.
4 Comments:
Caught the show today and thought I might comment on the welfare subject.
It is true that there are some people who cheat the system, but there is a need for a safety net for the poor, especially with today's economy.
What gets to me about welfare reform is that the GOP tried to enact a very strict welfare reform bill without doing anything to fix the economy. It's true that Clinton's Administration added a lot of new jobs, but many of them were in the service industry fields-part-time temporary low wage jobs with no health care/retirement benefits. Poor people can't live on that kind of money, especially not in cities where rents, etc. are high. Bush lost something like 3,000,000 jobs during his first term. A lot of middle class professional people have been downsized, too. I read something, recently, about college educated people being one of the groups most likely to experience long term unemployment. The unemployment figures are misleading, anyway, because a lot of people have run out of unemployment benefits, have dropped out of the labor market, or are underemployed.
Second, not everyone who gets assistance gets cash assistance. A lot of people who work get food stamps and Medicaid. Even some of our military families qualify for food stamps because their pay is so low. In many other cases, people get Medicaid because it's the ONLY way their kids can have health care. At the rate the GOP is going, funding for vaccinations and family planning through the Public Health will be cut next.
One of the other major issues with welfare is daycare. The GOP has been cutting funding for daycare as well as job training, student loans/grants, transportation, etc. How is a single mother who makes $5.15 an hr. and has at least one child supposed to pay for daycare? Funding for after school programs is being cut, too. Are these mothers supposed to leave their kids home alone?
The worst of it is that the folks who are pushing this the most are the ones who are saying that mothers should stay home with their children. Yet, they are supposed to get off welfare and go out and work according to these people. That's a Catch 22 situation. I guess, the idea is that there shouldn't be any single mothers because the conservatives are also against pre-marital sex and divorce. I'm all for promoting adoption among single moms, not to mention them not getting pregnant out of wedlock to begin with. Of course, these folks are also against contraception. Bottom line, is that women should not be trapped into relationships with men who may be abusive, have substance abuse problems, etc. in order to have financial security.
The reactionary conservatives wouldn't go for that argument, though, because they are also anti-feminism and want to reverse all the progress made toward rights for women and children.
Was listening to the show the other day when there was some discussion about what we didn't like about conservatives/liberals. What I don't like about conservatives could fill a book, I guess, but when I say conservatives I really mean the ultra-conservatives. I guess, I would have to call myself a liberal moderate (or a moderate liberal), as I have both liberal and conservative views on the issues. I could call myself progressive, I guess, but that basically means I'm a liberal.
The things I dislike most about most conservatives is their intolorance and their sanctimonious holier than thou attitudes. Most of them aren't rich J.R. Ewing types getting huge tax breaks and exploiting the environment and everyone else. Yet they voted for Bush, unbelievable! It just makes/made me sick to see a Bush sticker/sign on the vehicle or in the yard of a working class or poor person. It's not logical. The only thing I can think is that they are being brainwashed in evangelical churches. I know some of these churches told people that voting for Kerry would be a mortal sin. Pro-Bush campaign literature was put on cars at local churches.
They are so sure that they are right and that they are good christians, but nothing the GOP is doing is christian. They think Democrats/liberals are evil and stupid, but they're the ones who believe everything our so called liberal media, Rush Limbaugh, etc. says and never try to find out the truth. They're in total denial and happy with it. That would be OK if they weren't endangering the country and the world and casting stones at anyone who disagrees with them.
I know Republicans who voted for Kerry. I never used to dislike Republicans, but they've brought it on themselves.
More about why I don't like SOME conservatives. As I said, I know Republicans who voted for Kerry. I know Republicans who voted for Bush who are perfectly nice and intelligent people, some of them in my own family. I'm a Liberal Democrat, but I've voted for Republicans before, myself, (rarely).
I didn't used to feel so much animosity toward the GOP, but so many of them are just plain mean about liberals or anyone else who disagrees with them. Plus they're often too ignorant to know what they're talking about and still insist they're right. They believe if they heard it on FOX News or from Rush Limbaugh, etc. it's the gospel truth. Then they call us names, say we're stupid, etc. So, of, course we've gotten angry. I kind feel we need to be like Peter Finch in that movie, "Network" and stand up and say we're "mad as *^#@ and not going to take it anymore."
Look what happened here. The Bushies are supposed to be better Christians than the Dems, yet some of them stole our campaign signs, destroyed the sign at the P.O., and vandalized our headquarters. How is this Christian? It's happening all over the country, though, and most of it can be blamed on the right wing hate blogs/talk shows. Bush should be called the President of the Divided States of America becuse he is a divider not a uniter, no matter what he thinks.
As I ran out of time to finish my comments on the show re: the obstetrics area of health care, I thought I'd just put it on the blog.
This isn't exactly political, but it's something women/parents usually like to talk about.
As I said, OBs are leaving the field because the lawsuts/malpractice ins. has become too much of a liability-not good. The ones who stay are so worried about being sued they go overboard so they can say they did everything possible. That means using equipment/procedures meant for high risk patients on low risk patients (fetal monitors, anesthesia, forceps, labor induction, C-sections). This is especially true in teaching hospitals so the med students get to practice. Problem is it's not necessarily good for the baby and may put it at greater risk (CP, respiratory problems, etc.). That just increases the risk of the OB getting sued. Besides it takes control of the birth experience away from the parents-another of the problem with health care being the dehumanization of patients who should have rights, for goodness sake!
If we had the health care system set up that we need we could do what they do in Europe. Nurse mid-wives take care of low risk OB patients who see an OB a couple of times. High risk patients are referred to an OB for all their care. This costs less and the midwife has more time to give the mother-to-be GOOD prenatal and post-natal care (as opposed to a 10 min. visit w/an OB every mo.). Since pregnancy is not considered an ILLNESS, home births and maternity centers are the rule of thumb. American OBs will tell you that's dangerous. How do they explain the low rate of infant mortality in Europe and Japan then? In 1994, the US was only 18th on the list for infant mortality-pretty sad for the nation with the best medical care in the world.
Also, the HMOs and Medicaid have to pay for all this high tech stuff that isn't USUALLY necessary. Figure that if a normal delivery is $2000, w/an epidural it could be $3000, and if mom then has to have a C-section because she had an epidural instead of doing Lamaze it could be $6000. I'm not against using the technology, etc. if it's NECESSARY, but it would make a difference re: the cost of health care if it wasn't standard procedure to avoid lawsuits.
Post a Comment
<< Home