"You're done are you? Why? Why would you cede the field the to guys who want to eliminate Medicare?"
As I was typing my response to this person, an effort which took 20 minutes, several others tried to tell this person to just leave my comment be. But the commenter was persistent. He/she just kept pressing, their responses getting more and more impatient and biting. The final one being:
Okay, well then what does it [the word done] mean
in this context? And why are you speaking for someone more than capable of speaking for herself?
Being I had responded to this person's original comment and then redirected them to it in response to their biting critique above, I replied to them a second time in a rather graceless fashion, for me:
I took the time answer you. Twice. Yes, I am more than capable of speaking for myself. I wanted to take the time to be clear, which I believe I was. And no response from you? After all the pressing and questions? No snappy retort?
They responded more politely with this, three hours later after I'd already logged off:
"Well, it's hard to respond in any meaningful way to your very real crisis in a blog comment. I'm sorry, but I just was at a loss for words. I sincerely appreciate the fact that you shared your story with me, however."
To which I replied:
Understood. That said, it shouldn't be a stretch to see how hard it is to respond to someone who clearly has no idea just how harshly and severely these policies that our politicians are bartering away as though it's an endless supply of other people's money at the crap tables in Vegas are affecting some of us.
It's not just politics and keeping Dems in the White House and in the majority in the Senate and House to some of us.
You might want to consider that the next time you feel the need to verbally press someone in a public forum about why they've thrown their hands up in disgust and thrown in the towel when it comes to self-professed political leaders who are literally killing some of their constituents, concession by concession.
Namaste.
Some of us are being sacrificed for the greater good, concession by concession. Literally.
If this part of the bill goes through with the following inclusion, I am done. And I mean that very literally.
* A 12-member congressional committee, made up equally of Republicans and Democrats from each chamber, would be tasked with finding a further $1.5 trillion in budget savings.
* That committee could find savings from an overhaul of the tax code and restructuring benefit programs like Medicare -- the politically risky decisions that lawmakers have not been able to agree on so far.
* If the committee cannot agree on at least $1.2 trillion in savings, or Congress rejects its findings, automatic spending cuts totaling that amount would kick in starting in 2013.
* Those cuts would fall equally on domestic and military programs. Medicare would face automatic cuts as well, but Social Security, Medicaid, federal employee pay, and benefits for veterans and the poor would be exempt.
(Emphasis mine.)
(Source)
This will be in the form of Medicare provider cuts.
(Source)
While this may mean little to many here especially the "Stop blaming the President and Democrats for your problems" or the "So, how are you going to vote in 2012?" crowd, it will affect me just as harshly as single-payer being kept off the bargaining table back when the HCR package was being discussed did.
See, I waited and I was patient. When I tried to illustrate why I was disappointed in the President conceding single payer or even a viable public option in the HCR package that was passed, something he himself expresses regret about, I got verbally lynched by quite a few here.
I should've known better. The responses ranged from emotionless politic-speak:
I understand the diarist's feelings about urgency but as you say there are systemic problems and we as progressives have got to work harder to make our vision for change a long term campaign, the people who helped bring this country to it's knees aren't going away anytime soon.
That sounds very pragmatic when it's not your sh*t being bargained away.
Let them put people's retirement plans or their existing 401Ks on the bargaining table . . . bet that raises some of the blood pressures around here by more than a few points. That's what "shared sacrifice" feels like. It sucks, doesn't it?
Add to it the people who consistently step in to fan the flames when exchanges ignite and the verbal toxicity begins to flow and it's like watching an injured shark, so caught up in the bloodlust that it's feeding on its own entrails. Charming.
Then we have the people who just can't stop themselves from coming in just to state that the President's a good person and has a hard job.
As though any of what I expressed concern about indicated that he wasn't or his job wasn't.
Or the ones who will post a diary, almost in retaliation, stating all the good things the President's gotten accomplished in his time in the White House, which I've never disputed.
Or my personal favorite . . . the people who chime in just to detail how some of the President's decisions have benefited them.
Which is great . . . however, that isn't the point I'm addressing.
What I'm addressing is what's consistently being allowed to fall through the cracks.
The fact is, these decisions, which are affecting people's lives, are being seen by far too many minus the human interest angle. cskendrick said it here better than I ever could:
. . .the human interest angle of HCR has gotten lost in the intra-partisan squabble for control of the destiny of the Democratic Party by many here.
So, if this stays on the table, yes, I'm done.
Some of you will probably swoop in to shout me down, mock and/or ridicule me, or write a about what a downer I am and email/message those like-minded to 'swarm'. (What a strange practice that is - as though it changes anything.) Call me whatever you need to feel better about yourselves, but I'm done.
So there's no misunderstanding - done means just this:
I'm one of the people that the shiny new HCR package doesn't help at all. And you'll excuse me, but at the SEIU Healthcare Forum in Las Vegas, March 24, 2007 the President, then a candidate for President, said:
"My commitment is to make sure that we've got universal health care for all Americans by the end of my first term as president."
Then sometime between March 2007, and May, 2007, something changed drastically because this is what his stand had changed to:
'If you’re starting from scratch,’ he [Obama] says, ‘then a single-payer system’-a government-managed system like Canada’s, which disconnects health insurance from employment-’would probably make sense. But we’ve got all these legacy systems in place, and managing the transition, as well as adjusting the culture to a different system, would be difficult to pull off. So we may need a system that’s not so disruptive that people feel like suddenly what they’ve known for most of their lives is thrown by the wayside.’
See, when he campaigned he said he opposed a mandate and never followed through on what he said.
I'm not making this stuff up. He most certainly did say these things.
He gets elected and to my surprise, there I am sitting in Pittsburgh at NN09 and the news is telling me how Billy Tauzin has again been invited to the White House.
Pan forward, the HCR package gets pushed through, as lame as it is for some of us, and then the President expresses regret about not being more hands on regarding the heathcare legislation.
See, I needed single payer. I was diagnosed with NHL w/blood and bone marrow involvement in 2008, after 7 years of having problems with my blood. I was married at that time and had my ex's healthcare insurance through his employer and Medicare as my secondary because of disablity.
In 2009, I got divorced and I lost the ex's healthcare insurance that day. All I have now is Medicare. I pay $95/mo. for healthcare coverage and an additional $81/mo. for a prescription plan through Medicare. And you tell me that I'm eligible to get supplimental through the high risk plans. That sounds real nice, but have you priced the high risk plans? I'm on disability. The federal high risk plan in my state will cost me between $250 and $450/mo. and the state high risk plan will cost me between $600 and $800. And I can afford neither and still be able to afford my monthly bills.
On the 15th of this month, I see my oncologist. I'm due for another bone marrow aspiration. The pathology for the last one was over $7,500.00 and I'm responsible for 20%.
And when it comes time for treatment, I'm probably going to be prescribed Rituximab.
Now, what most people don't know that many chemotherapies aren't covered by just Medicare. They're covered by the prescription plan. Rituximab on my plan is $3,750.00/mo. for a 2 month course and they normally prescribed two 28-day courses, which mean I'll fall into the donut hole before I complete my first course. And my co-pay before that happens will be almost $2,900.
It'll be easier for me and less costly to my family in the end if I just let the cancer kill me.
And now, now, they want the ability to limit even more of the already limited number of doctors who accept patients who have access to only Medicare??
That is the meaning of the word done
So those of you who so choose, insult me as much as you need to in order make yourself feel better, but as far as I'm concerned, the President and Congress didn't do anything for me regarding this HCR package and now, they're probably going to make an already less-than mediocre decision even worse. And I absolutely refuse to embrace or applaud it.
I know this will probably fall on deaf ears, but I'd like to ask - please don't bother responding unless you've actually clicked on each one of the links and read them or listened to them completely.
Update: Interestingly, many are responding as though the first response to my tip jar has anything to do with what I've written here. Before you reply with a response about how horrible it'll be "If Dems stay home in 2012 . . .", keep in mind, nowhere in this diary did I state anything at all about my voting in 2012 or whether or not anyone else should.©