What a scumbag post to write. You literally could not sound any more obnoxiously pretentious if you tried.
This guy has to spend the next month laying face down as he recovers from emergency eye surgery and you want him to think about some health care claptrap as if he alone has the power to influence it.
You sit there on your little soft bottom, living your soft life, and you have the gall to fault him for having VA health care as a medically disabled veteran because he was blown up by an IED? Claire, sweetheart, we both know the hardest thing you've ever done likely pales in comparison to one of the more difficult days he spent in Afghanistan; you doubtlessly avoid confronting that truth, but the truth it is.
Billy, one of the things that astonishes me about the internet is how impervious it makes people to information and basic reading skills. I do not fault him for having healthcare--he deserves it. My point is, all Americans do. How could you read such a post and not understand that the point is that everyone should have access to the surgery Dan Crenshaw had--and they don't, because he has led the charge to exclude them from it? Or that Crenshaw has the best medical care in the world, while he promotes plans that literally cheat people? The man is in a desperate situation, and I am sympathetic to it. He is also a hypocrite. Dan Crenshaw needs to do better. And so do you, Snowflake.
Claire, now you're just embarrassing yourself. And for you to call someone else a "snowflake" is comical. Reading through your posts is like an exercise in being a "snowflake," not to mention the sedentary life you've led and what seems to be a remarkably fragile psyche.
Crenshaw is not a hypocrite. You just can't seem to understand that not everything is as simple as you falsely suggest; health care legislation is nuanced and complex. It is not something that can be accomplished with absolutist thinking. It always blows my mind that you and your ilk think the simplistic "everyone should have free health care" blanket solution is not only practical, but ideal. We get it; you like to virtue signal.
By way of example, Bernie Sanders’s “Medicare for All” proposal would impose $32 trillion in new costs over ten years and a likely annual tax increase of $26,000 per American household. As of 2019, the average household income was $68,703. Many, many families make far less. And yet you think imposing that kind of tax increase on people is not just fair and appropriate, but wise?
Crenshaw argues Medicare for All would rip private health insurance away from millions of Americans, and according to experts it would lead to longer wait times and reduced quality of care. He's also (correctly) argued that the Democrat drug pricing proposal would crush innovation, and according to the Council of Economic Advisors would result in 100 less future cures. He wants to give Americans access to high-quality, affordable health care that they're in control of, which is why he introduced legislation to expand personalized health care through Direct Primary Care, and has a bill that would lower drug costs without limiting access to life-saving cures.
Regardless of whatever quibbles and qualms you have with Crenshaw, the bottom line is nobody should attack someone in his position right now, however small your following is (likely in the single digits based on what I can see).
By the way, my undergrad is in American history; I can only imagine the ways in which you skew history through your progressivist ideology, forcing your students to view everything through that tainted prism.
What a scumbag post to write. You literally could not sound any more obnoxiously pretentious if you tried.
This guy has to spend the next month laying face down as he recovers from emergency eye surgery and you want him to think about some health care claptrap as if he alone has the power to influence it.
You sit there on your little soft bottom, living your soft life, and you have the gall to fault him for having VA health care as a medically disabled veteran because he was blown up by an IED? Claire, sweetheart, we both know the hardest thing you've ever done likely pales in comparison to one of the more difficult days he spent in Afghanistan; you doubtlessly avoid confronting that truth, but the truth it is.
Do better, Claire.
Billy, one of the things that astonishes me about the internet is how impervious it makes people to information and basic reading skills. I do not fault him for having healthcare--he deserves it. My point is, all Americans do. How could you read such a post and not understand that the point is that everyone should have access to the surgery Dan Crenshaw had--and they don't, because he has led the charge to exclude them from it? Or that Crenshaw has the best medical care in the world, while he promotes plans that literally cheat people? The man is in a desperate situation, and I am sympathetic to it. He is also a hypocrite. Dan Crenshaw needs to do better. And so do you, Snowflake.
Claire, now you're just embarrassing yourself. And for you to call someone else a "snowflake" is comical. Reading through your posts is like an exercise in being a "snowflake," not to mention the sedentary life you've led and what seems to be a remarkably fragile psyche.
Crenshaw is not a hypocrite. You just can't seem to understand that not everything is as simple as you falsely suggest; health care legislation is nuanced and complex. It is not something that can be accomplished with absolutist thinking. It always blows my mind that you and your ilk think the simplistic "everyone should have free health care" blanket solution is not only practical, but ideal. We get it; you like to virtue signal.
By way of example, Bernie Sanders’s “Medicare for All” proposal would impose $32 trillion in new costs over ten years and a likely annual tax increase of $26,000 per American household. As of 2019, the average household income was $68,703. Many, many families make far less. And yet you think imposing that kind of tax increase on people is not just fair and appropriate, but wise?
Crenshaw argues Medicare for All would rip private health insurance away from millions of Americans, and according to experts it would lead to longer wait times and reduced quality of care. He's also (correctly) argued that the Democrat drug pricing proposal would crush innovation, and according to the Council of Economic Advisors would result in 100 less future cures. He wants to give Americans access to high-quality, affordable health care that they're in control of, which is why he introduced legislation to expand personalized health care through Direct Primary Care, and has a bill that would lower drug costs without limiting access to life-saving cures.
Regardless of whatever quibbles and qualms you have with Crenshaw, the bottom line is nobody should attack someone in his position right now, however small your following is (likely in the single digits based on what I can see).
By the way, my undergrad is in American history; I can only imagine the ways in which you skew history through your progressivist ideology, forcing your students to view everything through that tainted prism.