Republicans to 9/11 Responders: Die, and Die Quickly

Quote from bugscoe:

For you and Gabby since it appears you both suffer from poor reading skills:



Now why don't you two wise ones explain why the democrats would do this when they could have passed the bill with a simple majority??

I'm going to make some popcorn...
Just summarize it for me. Who voted no?
 
Quote from bugscoe:

For you and Gabby since it appears you both suffer from poor reading skills:



Now why don't you two wise ones explain why the democrats would do this when they could have passed the bill with a simple majority??

I'm going to make some popcorn...

Perhaps they thought that given the nature of the bill and how the Repubs expressed support for it, they will vote for it. So why did 93% of Repubs voted against it while 94% of Dems voted for it?
 
Quote from Gabfly1:

Just summarize it for me. Who voted no?

Your non answer confirms what the article discussed.

Thank you.

But Democrats did not need Republicans—or need to consider their qualms—to pass this bill.

They had a comfortable margin to make this health care program a reality for the heroes of Sept. 11. Instead, Democrats adopted a crudely partisan, morally repugnant tack by hiking the vote threshold for passage.
 
Quote from bugscoe:

Your non answer confirms what the article discussed.

Thank you.
Your non answer confirms what hermit's posted article discussed.

Thank you.
 
Boy, you people are slow, dimwitted, sheep....this is not a republican, democrat issue... it is the rich, multinationals and insurance companies fucking the middle class, small business and even the insured who got ill, while saving lives during an attack. The fact that we even have this problem is symptomatic to the degenerate state of the US state of politics and affairs, and the dumbing down the general public. The reality is the the democrats are just as much a bunch of whores, in the pockets of the multis as the gop assholes...the people defending these despicable vermin are all trust fund babies and stock owners who would sell their grandmothers for quarterly profits.
Quote from hermit:

Nearly 70 percent of 9/11 first responders have debilitating respiratory illnesses.


Many of them have been ill for years and will be for the rest of their lives.

Dr. Robin Herbert, who runs the World Trade Center medical monitoring program, called the report's findings sobering at a news conference earlier this week.

"Somebody has to take responsibility and make sure these folks get the care they need," he said.

In the last few months, state and federal officials have announced that millions of dollars will go to the treatment of first responders.

Many say it's still not enough.

"It's a drop in the bucket, and my worry is that money will be gone in a year, and what happens then," Herbert said.

Victims say they have little reason to trust what is being promised because the government's statements have not matched what the doctors have seen in their patients since the day of the attacks.

From 2006 and still not much done - http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2409716&page=1
 
Quote from Gabfly1:

Your non answer confirms what hermit's posted article discussed.

Thank you.

But Democrats did not need Republicans—or need to consider their qualms—to pass this bill.

They had a comfortable margin to make this health care program a reality for the heroes of Sept. 11. Instead, Democrats adopted a crudely partisan, morally repugnant tack by hiking the vote threshold for passage.
 
Quote from loza:

Boy, you people are slow, dimwitted, sheep....this is not a republican, democrat issue... it is the rich multinationals and insurance companies fucking the middle class, small business and even the insured who got ill, while saving lives during an attack. The fact that we even have this problem is symptomatic to the degenerate state of the US state of politics and affairs, and the dumbing down the general public. The reality is the the democrats are just as much a bunch of whores, in the pockets of the multis as the gop assholes...

Typical Con retort, when they are exposed in anyway - they would like to claim how both sides are doing the same.

And between, the Repubs didnt vote for it because the legislation prevented foreign corporations incorporated in tax haven countries from avoiding tax on income earned in the US which the Repubs are calling as 'tax increase'. That doesnt sound like 'fucking the middle class, small business' as you like to claim.

Do some research next time before getting your ignorant ass into a civilized discussion.
 
well if you look carefully, the special interests and complete lack of representation of citizen voters has been around for what, the last 40-years? When was the last time anyone uttered the words "campaign reform"? As long as the elections and politics stay as they are (corrupt!!!!), big money, special interest controlled, the people and small businesses will have no representation. The democrats are just as guilty as the GOP. They are all controlled by BIG MONEY...
Quote from hermit:

Typical Con retort, when they are exposed in anyway - they would like to claim how both sides are doing the same.

And between, the Repubs didnt vote for it because the legislation prevented foreign corporations incorporated in tax haven countries from avoiding tax on income earned in the US which they are calling as 'tax increase'. That doesnt sound like 'fucking the middle class, small business' as you like to claim.

Do some research next time before getting your ignorant ass into a civilized discussion.
 
Quote from loza:

well if you look carefully, the special interests and complete lack of representation of citizen voters has been around for what, the last 40-years? When was the last time anyone uttered the words "campaign reform"? As long as the elections and politics stay as they are (corrupt!!!!), big money, special interest controlled, the people and small businesses will have no representation. The democrats are just as guilty as the GOP. They are all controlled by BIG MONEY...

Well, it was uttered very recently infact and guess what, the GOP voted it down.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/27/politics/main6718510.shtml
 
Let's try this again.

1. Who voted no?

2. Why, specifically, did they vote no?

3. What is the result of their voting no?

Gee...

attachment.php
 

Attachments

Back
Top