Skip to content

Tea Party Express II in San Diego

October 26, 2009 - 9:06 am

honduras

This weekend, the “Tea Party Express” tour kicked off its second national tour at Tuna Harbor Park in San Diego. Here’s the propaganda video:

(Note: The video is jerky. I’ll repost when the Tea Partiers do)

So, check out the 3:55 minute mark and a conserva-folk band playing its song “Universal Health Care: A Big Fat No.”

OK, this really pissed me off. I mean, fair enough if the Tea Partiers don’t want a government-run plan, but WTF is up with them opposing some sort of other reform that results in every American having access to health care? I mean that’s a Big Fat Yes to Americans picking up the tab for poor folks who show up in emergency rooms for minor ailments.

Also, I’m not sure that Honduras is the example the US should be following, particularly when it comes to peaceful protesters:

Rosamaria Valeriano Flores was returning home from a visit to a public health clinic and found herself in a crowd of people dispersing from a demonstration in support of the ousted president, Manuel Zelaya. As she crossed the central square of the Honduran capital, a group of soldiers and police officers pushed her to the ground and beat her with their truncheons.

She said the men kicked out most of her top teeth, broke her ribs and split open her head. “A policeman spit in my face and said, ‘You will die,’ ” she said…

Advertisements
14 Comments leave one →
  1. Curious permalink
    October 26, 2009 - 1:14 pm 1:14 pm

    What “really pisses you off” about not wanting to be coerced into paying for someone’s health care?

    How many poor people who you do not know do you currently provide health care funding for? Surely you wouldn’t want to force me to do something that you yourself do not currently do.

    If the government is a big benevolent giver of good things, how much extra, above and beyond your minimum legal requirement, do you send to the IRS in order for the US government to provide more benevolent gifts to the deserving but poor?

  2. October 26, 2009 - 1:36 pm 1:36 pm

    Hey, read my post again, Curious.

    I understand the argument against the public option/government-run health care. It’s valid. But that’s completely different from the concept of universal health care, which is simply what it says: that everyone has the ability to get access to health care. That could be a completely private system, with the regulations amended to allow for greater competition, tax rebates, reducing medical malpractice claims, tort reform., eliminating preexisting condition denials, etc….

    Point is, universal health care should be the common goal—but public vs. private should remain the debate.

    As for the rest of your comments….well, CUrious, insurance inherently means you’re paying for other people’s health care. I rarely go to the doctor and I’ve not had a surgery in a decade. My insurance money pays for those on the plan who do have illnesses. That’s how insurance works. The only way to ensure you’re not paying for someone else’s health care is pay for everything out of pocket….of course, with the inflated health costs associated with our current system, that means you’re still paying far above the actual costs.

    As far as the money I pay for poor people’s health care: Well, let’s see…I pay my social security taxes, and that pays for the care of the elderly who can no longer support themselves. I also pay state taxes that pay for the health care of prison inmates. My tax dollars go towards supporting the developmentally disabled. My tax dollars also go towards keeping hospitals open, despite the huge amounts spent on treating minor ailments in the ER.

    And when it comes to people forcing me to pay for things I don’t want to: Can I please have my money back from the Iraq war? Can I also please have back my tax dollars that were distributed to faith-based programs?

    • Curious permalink
      October 27, 2009 - 9:40 am 9:40 am

      Dave,

      I agree wholeheartedly with you re: Iraq, faith-based horseshit, etc. In fact, I would like ALL of my federal money back.

      I also agree that reform is definitely needed, but none of the current proposed bills address it in a way that A: will work, and B: will not bankrupt us further in the long run. I think the tea party guys are addressing that more than anything.

      I’m a big fan of the Whole Foods model, but even that, which is entirely rational and will lead to greater coverage and lowered costs, has been viciously attacked by the Single Payer backing left.

      The problem for me with “universal” coverage is that medical care is a commodity. There is only so much produced. If you make sure everyone has coverage you will by definition force redistribution of the coverage via non-market forces. Non-market forces are notoriously inefficient and unfair in the end. Medicare and Medicaid are tremendous non-market forces that drive health care costs up by eliminating the need for innovation and price competition by providers.

      Any time something is universal, it is immediately almost worthless. Think “no child Left Behind” and high school diploma. It now means nothing because everyone HAS to graduate.

      Bottom line for me: The federal government can do almost nothing right. Nothing on time, nothing on budget and nothing efficient. The only thing I can think of that they do very well is kill.

      In the past 8 years with GWB and now Obama we have seen massive increases in federal power, spending, deficits and debt. I do not like this regardless of who is in power. Unfortunately most people seem to want federal power when their guy is in, and despise it when the other team is in. I happen to dislike both teams and just want to keep my money and be left alone.

  3. mr. mike permalink
    October 27, 2009 - 1:44 am 1:44 am

    I like how the banner claims that the “Marxist” Obama has “Czars” working for him. Up there with the “Get a Brain! Morans” guy.

  4. No Govt run Health permalink
    October 27, 2009 - 1:59 am 1:59 am

    hi dave,

    first you are incorrect in that paying insurance is paying for someone else’s health care. How insurance companies make money is off of the interest they ultimately make from your premiums. What you are talking about is a Social security type of scheme which could be considered a ponzi scheme.

    As for Mr. Mike….do you not know there are czars that obama puts into high positions? please look it up! No other president in the history of the US has ever done this and quite frankly …it’s a bit scaring. We have a checks and balance system and him appointing czars totally is against this system. As a democracy, we don’t even have a say in electing them….so you should be a bit scared too no matter what side you are.

  5. October 27, 2009 - 8:05 am 8:05 am

    Hi NGRH-

    Um, I don’t see how your point and mine are mutually exclusive. The interest they make off premiums is one avenue of profit revenue for the insurance companies. But the concept of insurance is a pooled system. Here’s a succinct explanation from the Rocky Mountain Insurance Information Center, an industry-run organization:

    “Many people make the mistake of thinking their insurance works like a bank account—money in, money out with interest when they need it. Insurance is about spreading out the risk among everyone who buys insurance from your same insurance company. Your premium goes to help fund losses suffered by the entire group. As a pooled resource, you can cover the larger losses suffered by individuals. Your company works for you by trying to minimize the amount of risk.”

    So, you just called the insurance industry a ponzi scheme.

    As for czars, it’s untrue that “other president in the history of the US has ever done this.” The Bush Administration appointed a comparable number of czars. Is it arguable whether this scary or not? Sure. But it’s inaccurate to state that Obama was the first.

  6. October 27, 2009 - 9:04 am 9:04 am

    Obama was definitely not the first U.S. President to appoint “czars.” They’ve been around since FDR at least. Check it out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._executive_branch_czars

  7. selena permalink
    October 27, 2009 - 11:04 am 11:04 am

    but obama is the first to have such and excessive about of czars which are only answerable to him.

  8. October 27, 2009 - 11:28 am 11:28 am

    How were Bush’s 46 people appointed to 37 czar positions during his term not an “excessive about?”

  9. October 29, 2009 - 1:51 am 1:51 am

    All those liberals “think” we are nuts. But, they do not have a clue as to what we are doing. Actually we are protesting for “their” FREEDOM, and they just can not see it. They actually think the government really cares for them and their health insurance. Are they in for a great, but bad awakening.

  10. October 29, 2009 - 8:09 am 8:09 am

    I don’t know that liberals think the government “really cares for them and their health care,” but that liberals KNOW the insurance companies do not and the government is a lot easier to hold accountable.

  11. Jim permalink
    November 18, 2009 - 4:50 am 4:50 am

    Mason Weaver is one of those cooky Tea Party Patriots

    ————————————————————

    November 12 at 5:13am on FACEBOOK
    Mason Weaver: Veterans Day Message!

    It seems very interesting to me that everyone else’s problems requires an action on the part of America. Why is it that I must act to make other countries a better place to live? A nuclear bomb in Iran is much more a Saudi Arabian problem than an American problem…

    ————————————————————-

    Mason Weaver is an ignorant candidate running for Congress in San Diego. Running as a Republican in name only, this foolish man believes that the United States should return to full isolationism.

    He believes that Iran should be permitted to continue their pursuit of nuclear energy and weapons. He’s so ignorant, that he also believes that the country at greatest risk when Iran aquires nuclear weapons is Saudi Arabia. It just might be that he forgot about Israel, or the ties that Iran has had to the terrorists who threaten our own safety on US soil.

    Mason Weaver probably believes that Saddam Hussein ought to have been allowed to continue to pay the family of Palestian suicide bombers $25,000 each. Not to worry, Saddam only spent over $35million as reward money to these families.

    Mason weaver probably also belives that the United States should ignore the Genocide in Darfur, Russian Agression in Georgia, global arms trafficing and the rampant spread of aids in third world countries. Because afterall, Mason Weaver doesn’t seem to care that America has a history of making a tremendous impact in solving some of the worlds problems. That America, has been proud to support and bring together many nations to solve many problems, which require leadership and acting first to set an example. Whether through sending aid, peacekeepers or investing in new efforts to save lives from poverty, sickness or war, the United States must act as a leader to stop these problems.

    ————————

    Message Mason on Facebook and let him know how unqualified he is to run for congress
    http://www.facebook.com/masonweaver

    or email him at MasonWeaver@MasonWeaver.com

  12. November 26, 2009 - 8:45 pm 8:45 pm

    This is a non-jerky version of the same clip that I uploaded with Jays permission.

  13. November 26, 2009 - 8:47 pm 8:47 pm

    Opps, sorry that is not the right protest. I don’t have the clip for the Tea Party Express.

    Roger

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: