GOP Says Ill People Who Are Poor Should Just Die Already

Jimmy Kimmel tearfully explained his newborn son's
health crisis the other night on his show and pleaded
with lawmakers not to literally kill poorer children
in the same situation through their Obamacare
repeal efforts

I was among the many this week who was struck by the contrast between late night television host Jimmy Kimmel's heartfelt on-air description of his newborn son's health crisis and some members of the GOP, who apparently would like ill children like Kimmel's to just get out of the way and die already.

Kimmel's son Billy was born last week and it quickly became apparent he had a heart defect and needed immediate surgery.

Terrifying for any parent, for sure.

A tearful Kimmel said Billy pulled through, but waiting out the surgery was the longest three hours of his life

Kimmel's rich and has got resources and insurance to cover things like this. But, like most people, he thought about others who aren't so monied and what they'd do without health insurance.

"We were brought up to believe that we live in the greatest country in the world, but until a few years ago millions and millions of us had no access to health insurance at all, Kimmel said. 

"You know, before 2014, if you were born with congenital heart disease like my son was, there was a good chance you'd never be able to get health insurance because you had a pre-existing condition. You were born with a pre-existing condition and if your parents didn't have medical insurance you might not live long enough to even get denied because of a pre-existing condition. 

If your baby is going to die and doesn't have to, it shouldn't matter who much money you make."

Kimmel added: "Whatever your party, whatever you believe, whoever you support, we need to make sure that the people who are supposed to represent us, people who are meeting about this right now in Washington, understand that very clearly."

Of course, those GOP members that what to repeal Obamacare don't really represent their constituents. There's no money in that. They represent the insurance companies and such that keep the money flowing to these Congress creatures.

Just contrast what Kimmel said with what Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama said about health care, as just about every media outlet did on Tuesday.

Basically, many GOP Congress creatures want to let insurance companies charge anything they want to people with pre-existing conditions. In other words, people with such conditions who are not zillionaires will not be able to afford insurance.

You'll never catch any of these GOP members saying this out loud, but what they're telling us is people with pre-existing conditions just aren't profitable, so they need to die and get out of the way

Brooks came close to saying this when he told CNN's Jake Tapper:

"My understanding is that it will allow companies to require people who have higher health care costs to contribute more to the insurance pool.....thereby reducing the cost to these people who lead good lives. "

Brooks said people with pre-existing conditions just aren't being fair to people who are healthy: "They're healthy, they have done the things to keep their bodies healthy and right now those are the people who have done things the right way and are seeing costs skyrocket."

I guess Kimmel's son Billy didn't do things the right way. However, my guess is little Billy Kimmel didn't acquire his heart condition by chain smoking and constantly munching on Cheetos during the nine months or so he spent in his mother's womb.

Brooks did concede that some people have health conditions through no fault of their own, but didn't explain what we should do to help these people afford health insurance. Even if it's not their fault, ill people should just go away, apparently.

I get it that government programs can't and shouldn't do everything for everybody. However, health care, as most industrialized nations already know, should not be fully a matter of free markets.

If you're poor, it's OK to not be able to afford a unnecessary item like, say, an Alfa Romero. But literally causing the deaths of people who can't afford health care, like what some in the GOP want to do, is just pathological.

But I guess the zillionaires have to watch out for one another. Or something.

Conservative pundits piled on, too. Media Matters cited several, including Charles Hunt in the Washington Times, who said Kimmel gave a "slobbering wet kiss to federal bureacracy."  and called him a "dirty self-absorbed narcissistic exhibitionist."

The real problem here, being, that Kimmel called attention to the issue and we are supposed to shut up about it so as not to raise public anger at the GOP's efforts to kill poor people.

Media Matters also noted that Cheryl Chumley said Kimmel continued the left's "uncomfortable habit of slinging around tears to get what it wants."

She missed the point entirely when she said hospitals don't kick people out who need treatment. True, but without health insurance, people do not get the help they need, don't see doctors when they must, don't get life saving medication, and thus die, or at least go bankrupt

And the GOP is forging ahead. House Republicans say they have enough votes to do their Obamacare repeal and will take a vote today. These are terrible people.

Mississippi Lawmaker Wins Competition As Most Heartless Pol

This Mississippi politician apparently thinks
if you're not rich enough to buy
lifesaving medication on your own
maybe you should just die and get out of the way. 

When you're in Congress, or a state legislature, or a governor or whatever, you do have to make tough financial choices.

What gets funded, what doesn't based on limited tax revenue. The reality is some worthy, needed programs  - or people in a tough spot - just don't get the money they need.

Such is the case in Mississippi.

According to the Clarion-Ledger newspaper, a mom named Nicole Nichols was getting Medicaid to help pay fo ran expensive insulin pump for her eight year old daughter, who has insulin.

She is a stay at home mom, but her husband works two jobs, so the family does have an income.

But this pump is extremely expensive, the Nichols' can't afford it on their own, and they reluctantly had to turn to Medicaid to help pay for the life saving device.

Then, the company that supplied the pump outsourced products and shipping to another company.

That other company was not covered by Medicaid, and Nichols can't find another outfit that is covered by Medicaid. So she could no longer get the insulin pumps with help from Medicaid. She tried something like 23 of them.

So, that's not Nichols' fault. It's bureaucracy.

In frustration, she reached out to Mississippi state lawmakers. Two were sympathetic but not committal. They'll see what they can do. Which is fine, that's all you can really ask.

But a third state rep, Jeffrey Guice, R-Ocean Springs  wrote back and told Nichols: "I am sorry for your problem. Have you thought abouty buying the supplies with money that you earn?"

I'll remind you again here that Nichols and her husband are employed.  I'll also note that right now, the out of pocket expenses for their kid's insulin pump is $2,000 a month.

So what Guice is really saying is if your job doesn't pay enough to pay for the medicines you need to stay alive, you just have to earn more money. Just like that.

In other words, only rich people deserve life-saving medicine.

I won't paint Republicans with the same brush, since many of them at least have some compassion and have their act together.

But there is a strain of awfulness in some corners of the GOP in which I think they believe only the 1 percent deserve to live. Everybody else is expendable.

At least Guice was blunt about this belief, unlike a lot of 'em who say they want to help but not really.

Guice right now isn't talking about this, refusing to answer questions from the Clarion Ledger, telling the paper, "I don't do interviews."

Oh, OK, you're an elected official who also thinks he's not accountable to the public. We got a real winner here.

Although, after the outcry over his remarks, Guice still wasn't taking calls, but released this emailed statement to the Associated Press:

"I realize my remarks to Mrs. Nichols were completely insensitive and out of line. I am sorry and deeply regret my reply. I know nothing about her and her family and replied in knee-jerk fashion. I'd like to think the people of Mississippi and my constituents know that I'm willing to help where I am able."

I'm still not satisfied. Guise said he replied to Nichols in "knee-jerk fashion." In other words, he assumed Nichols was just another freeloader, just like every person on Medicaid or other government assistance allegedly is.

Time to get those stupid, simplistic assumptions out of your head, Mr. Guise

On the bright side, all this publicity over Guise's comments has prompted Mississippi Medicaid to step in and see if there's anything they can do for Nichols. They're supposed to get in touch with her today.

So I guess Guise did end up helping in his own, bitter way.

Horrible Person Left Dog To Die In Texas Flood, Thankfully Somebody Noticed

This dog was left to drown in a Texas flood, chained
to a porch as the water rose. A television news crew
and volunteers rescued her  

As noted in my sister blog, Matt's Weather Rapport, Texas had a really bad flood recently.

In one of the worst videos, but with one with a very happy ending, rescuers and a television news crews came upon a dog tied to a house in neck deep flood water, barely holding its head above water.

Television station KPRC reporter Phil Archer and a volunteer, Jeff Shimek jumped into the water, untied the dog from the porcj before the water rose high enough to drown the dog, and put the dog, named Archer, in their boat.  

"They chained him to the front of the fucking house,?" one of the men in the boat says when they encountered the dog.

Yep, they did.  You can see it all in the video at the bottom of this post. Poor Archer looks terrified, but that seemed mixed with gratitude when the rescuers put the dog in their boat.

The reporters and flood volunteers turned Archer over to the Houston Humane Society.

Humane Society spokeswoman Monica Schmidt said a ring around Archer's neck meant that she was chained outside for some time, Reuters reported.

A number of people have expressed interest in adopting Archer.

"She's a fantastic dog and deserves so much better than what she had," Schmidt said, according to Reuters.

The local sheriff is not happy with the people who left the dog chained in the water, either. If the find the people that left Archer behind, they might be charged with animal cruelty.

"This is infuriating," Sheriff Nevis wrote on his public Facebook page. "These residents will get a visit from me when they return."

Here's the video:

How I Somehow Managed To Sympathize With Paris Hilton

Paris Hilton is terrified in a cruel
prank for an Egyption TV show.  

Let's just say I'm totally not a fan of Paris Hilton.

She's the rich gal who is famous for being famous, who parties the nights away among all her rich friends in those rich clubs wearing all those rich clothes and having nothing rich or interesting to say.

I never thought I'd take her side on anything, but a cruel Egyptian TV host has me in total sympathy with Paris Hilton.

At least I think I sympathize with her if she wasn't in on this. It doesn't look like she was.

What happens in a YouTube video you might or might not want to watch below, is,  Hilton is in Dubai for the opening of a new hotel, says Huffington Post.

She's in a small plane, and the pilot does dramatic stunts to make it look like the plane is crashing.

One passenger opens the jet's side door and a man is tossed out. The five minutes of the "impending plane crash" has Hilton screaming and crying, which is what you'd expect out of anyone in a doomed plane.

Finally, the plane lands and Hilton, in tears, is told of the prank. "I almost thought I was going to die...That's been the biggest fear my whole life, dying in a plane."

I don't know if the host of this show thinks this is funny, but it's unspeakably cruel. And dangerous. Aside from something possibly going wrong with the stunts, such a prank could give someone post traumatic stress disorder, which can be a serious, long lasting condition and often hard to treat.

Paris Hilton is something of a punching bag, with her bad singing and her perfume called Fairy Dust. But it's one thing to criticize Hilton's lifestyle. It's quite another to traumatize her for no good reason other than TV ratings. 

For what it's worth, TMZ is reporting that Hilton is considering a lawsuit against the so-called pranksters. If she does, I hope she wins big. Not that she needs the money. But I'd like to see the "pranksters" taught a lesson.

I was a little reluctant to post the video. I couldn't watch it, really, because it is disturbing.

Anyway, here's the video if you want to watch. It might not last and might be pulled due to copyright complaints from the Egyption TV show.

And Paris, go ahead and sue. I'm totally on your side for this one.

I'm Greatly Relieved That Raju The Elephant Won't Have To Go Back To The Awful Guy Who Tortured Her

Raju the rescued elephant recovering at a wildlife refuge this
summer. An Indian court ruled he won't have to go back
to his abusive former "owner."  

I've never met him, but I've been terribly worried about Raju over the past several months.

Raju is an elephant living in India who was treated with terrible cruelty by his "owner" over the course of nearly five decades.

Back in July, an animal protection group called Wildlife SOS rescued Raju from his owner.

He'd been captured as a baby and spent about five decades in spiked shackles, being forced to work as a begging elephant, says the Huffington Post.

I don't know how a human being could do this for so long to a beautiful and intelligent animal like Raju, but it happened.

When Wildlife SOS rescued him earlier this year, a video of the rescue went viral because Raju could be seen crying with relief as the rescuers brought him what was probably the first act of kindness she'd seen in his entire life.

"'The vet and our team came with fruits and just started speaking softly to him, and to reassure him that we were there to help, and it was at that time that tears flooed down his face,' Nikki Sharp, the executive director of Wildlife SOS-USA told The Huffington Post, adding, 'They've done a lot of elephant rescues and the fact the tears were just coming down...he was weeping. It was an emotional moment and everyone was more motivated to get him on the truck and to safety.'

 The reason why I was worried is because, according to the Huffington Post,  it looked as if Raju's rescue would be short-lived. Her former "owner" sued to get her back, so Raju would live out her days in those shackles, begging and making that creepy guy money.

The previous owner was only named as a "Mr. Shahid," and he said the elephant was his. But the group that rescued Raju says Shadid was unspeakably cruel to the elephant, and besides, he had no papers proving he is the rightful owner.

But last week, an Indian court ruled that Shadid has no right to the elephant, and is charged with illegally obtaining him, says the Telegraph UK. 

So Raju will stay at the refuge where Wildlife SOS brought him.

In August, Wildlife SOS reported that Raju has been doing wonderfully at the refuge. He loves to play in the water, he is spoiled with buckets of foods, and he has even made some female friends.

Below, is a video, partly filmed the night Raju was rescued.

My favorite part of the video is when the gentle but determined man cutting the rusty, sharp chains off of Raju tells him, with conviction, "You'll never have to wear these again."

I'm so glad that promise came true.

Watch:

Judge Says Woman Should Lose Home Because She Forgot $6.30 Tax Bill

A judge in Pennsylvania has decided a widow should lose her home because she didn't pay $6.30 in unpaid interest on a tax bill.  

Eileen Battisti might get kicked out of her
house because she didn't notice and didn't pay
 a $6.30 tax bill.  

Hey, they sent Eileen Battisti the bill. She should have noticed it. There are consequences for not paying the bill, the judge seems to say, ignoring his own lack of a sense of proportion.

As the lawyers involve note, yes, on a strictly legal basis, the tax authority can take the home because the woman didn't pay the $6.30.

But you'd think a little humanity would work itself in. Maybe make her pay double, or triple or even ten times that $6.30 as punishment.

According to the Associated Press:

"Joe Askcar, Beaver County's chief solicitor, said the judge got the decision right, based on the law.

'The county never wants to see anybody lose their home, but at the same time, the tax sale law, the tax real estate law, doesn't give a whole lot of room for error, either,' Askar said."

Yeah, and I'm sure nobody in the Beaver County tax department has EVER made a $6.30 error. And if somebody there DID make a $6.30 error, they were fired, right? Or better yet, taken to a back alley, beaten, then shot to death, right?

Because the punishment has to fit the crime, right?

The decision was described as right, based on the law. Why is the law so harsh and stupid? Why do tax authorities seem so intent on wanting to seize property on technicalities?  If the law is so off kilter, why isn't anyone moving to change it?

As for Battisti, she said her husband handled the paperwork for the property's taxes until he died in 2004.

"It's bad - she had some hard times, I guess her husband kind of took care of a lot of that stuff," Askar said. "It seemed that she was having a hard time coping with the loss of her husband -and that just made it set in a little more."

I wonder how much money the county tax bureau there in Pennsylvania has spent on legal costs for this case?  How many thousands of dollars over $6.30?

I know they'll make a killing if they succeed in seizing Battisti's house. But she's appealing the decision against her, and the legal fees will keep spiraling up.

But I guess tax authorities in Beaver County, Pennsylvania get their jollies out of kicking widows out of their houses and into the streets.

Gives them a sense of power, I guess.