Dear Mr. President,
Ok, I guess I'm a socialist. Better Red than Dead. I should probably just break down and get Lenin's face tattooed on my bicep. What can I say, I'm hopelessly pro-firefighting. And, call me unreasonable, but I think firefighting services should be available, for free, for every person in America, regardless of where they live or if they are rich, poor, middle class or even Republican. If Dino Rosi's house is on fire, I really don't mind if some of the taxes I paid this year go toward putting it out. I know we don't really have HUAC any more, but I'm sure Michele Bachmann can whip something up to take care of me, right?
I'm writing in reference to a house fire in Tennessee. Because one home owner failed to pay the $75 rural residents are required to pay per year for firefighting services, his house burned to the ground. The man offered to pay for any expenses the firefighters might incur, and he was refused. The firefighters put out the part of the blaze that spread to his fee-paying neighbor's home, but sat outside in trucks with the necessary equipment to save his home and watched it burn.
If there's one policy area where you'd think that people could come together on, firefighting seems like it ought to be a strong contender. I do understand that this man's house was outside of city limits and so the fee for protecting him was to make up for the fact that his taxes didn't fund the fire department as those of city residents did. I get this. But when the moment comes and the firefighters are faced with a fire and don't put it out over $75, well, I think that something important is being missed. Emergency services should help people first, and worry about jurisdiction or expense after. Send the homeowner a bill, for God's sake. The fact that some people on the right are suggesting this man had it coming really upsets me. Forgive me, but what the hell kind of country is this? Whatever happened to love thy neighbor? Also, not to continually kick the issue of federal defense spending, but maybe if we were spending less money burning other countries to the ground, state and local emergency services wouldn't be quite so strapped for cash. Maybe we should apply this logic at the Federal level and stop offering tax evaders the services of the Federal government. Cease their mail delivery, refuse to allow them to fly or drive on federal highways and deny them Social Security.
While I may decry the policies that led to this, I have to indict the behavior of the firefighters themselves, as well. We have an obligation to help one another to the best of our abilities, on the clock or off. I don't have a whole lot of useful skills, but when I saw an old woman being assaulted at the bus stop, I stepped in to stop her assailant. Because I could. Because I have the training and the ability. My coworker is red-cross certified in First Aid, and you can bet he'd be the first to step up in a medical emergency, regardless of his likelihood of being compensated. My roommate speaks Spanish and will step up to translate for customers struggling to be understood. We all have skills and abilities and we all have a moral obligation to use those skills to help one another. These firefighters were trained professionals with the equipment (and also the time) to help put out the fire in this man's house and they refused to. That's shameful as public servants and shameful as human beings. Conservatives can spin and wring their hands and quote Ayn Rand all they want; at the end of the day there is right and there is wrong, damn it, and sometimes we're lucky enough know the difference.
So paint me red and call me comrade, because I guess I've been a socialist all along.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Showing posts with label socialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label socialism. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Day 240- Keeping it in perspective
Dear Mr. President,
Tonight the onset of a minor sore throat has me slightly panicked. It is almost certainly just a cold. I'll drink tea and plenty of fluids and be fine in a few days. The thought that keeps lingering in the back of my mind, however, is about the enormous medical debt my sister once had after a case of strep throat. At the time she was uninsured and it took her over a year to pay off the considerable ER bills. I looked in to what it would cost to be added on to my mother's policy, or to buy my own insurance through my school. Either plan would leave me with a co-pay that I (more than likely) couldn't afford, and the premiums would be more than half of what I pay in rent each month. I know the arguments for having insurance; I want to have insurance. But I also like buying groceries. What I mean to say is I could really go for some socialized medicine right about now.
I seem to be losing some perspective on the actual size of my problems lately. I should be glad that all I have is a sore throat, and that I'm healthy enough to work, and able to go to school. These should be good enough for me, right now. It could be worse, after all, I could be a meat-eater.
Speaking of losing all perspective, it seems that our country has been "wandering in darkness." It was really unlikely that I would find much to agree with Glenn Beck about today, but his religious tones surprised me. All of his talk about returning America to God and restoring our honor just didn't make any sense. Am I, as a secular American, laboring under the false illusion that this country has never had any shortage of religious devotion? Or is Beck, as a Christian, deluded in his idea that America has become too secular? I think the problem is that, so long as our standards for "too religious" or "too secular" are "more religious/secular than me" we will always see ourselves as a persecuted class. Anyway, Beck's speech today seemed harmless enough; if I think that his timing was tasteless and his message off-base, well, that's probably the nicest response I've had to anything he's ever said.
Lately I've been talking to a friend quite a bit about our mutual feeling that we've regressed. Bad habits and old problems seem to be creeping back in to our behavior, while the progress we'd made toward life goals is slipping away. This feeling of falling backwards was beginning to get overwhelming. Regaining my perspective on this, accepting that growth isn't linear or neat or increasing at a predictable rate has helped me calm down and remember that a few bad days don't mean that it's ok to give up. I think I see the whole Tea Party movement as a big regression for our country, back to the mentality that elected and re-elected President Bush. It may be all I can do to comfort myself with the thought that it, too, is a temporary setback, the inevitable ebb of our progress away from those times. A few bad days (or news cycles, or elections) don't mean that it's ok to give up. For now, I'm going to try to sleep away whatever is ailing me and avoid any WebMD-induced panic.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Tonight the onset of a minor sore throat has me slightly panicked. It is almost certainly just a cold. I'll drink tea and plenty of fluids and be fine in a few days. The thought that keeps lingering in the back of my mind, however, is about the enormous medical debt my sister once had after a case of strep throat. At the time she was uninsured and it took her over a year to pay off the considerable ER bills. I looked in to what it would cost to be added on to my mother's policy, or to buy my own insurance through my school. Either plan would leave me with a co-pay that I (more than likely) couldn't afford, and the premiums would be more than half of what I pay in rent each month. I know the arguments for having insurance; I want to have insurance. But I also like buying groceries. What I mean to say is I could really go for some socialized medicine right about now.
I seem to be losing some perspective on the actual size of my problems lately. I should be glad that all I have is a sore throat, and that I'm healthy enough to work, and able to go to school. These should be good enough for me, right now. It could be worse, after all, I could be a meat-eater.
Speaking of losing all perspective, it seems that our country has been "wandering in darkness." It was really unlikely that I would find much to agree with Glenn Beck about today, but his religious tones surprised me. All of his talk about returning America to God and restoring our honor just didn't make any sense. Am I, as a secular American, laboring under the false illusion that this country has never had any shortage of religious devotion? Or is Beck, as a Christian, deluded in his idea that America has become too secular? I think the problem is that, so long as our standards for "too religious" or "too secular" are "more religious/secular than me" we will always see ourselves as a persecuted class. Anyway, Beck's speech today seemed harmless enough; if I think that his timing was tasteless and his message off-base, well, that's probably the nicest response I've had to anything he's ever said.
Lately I've been talking to a friend quite a bit about our mutual feeling that we've regressed. Bad habits and old problems seem to be creeping back in to our behavior, while the progress we'd made toward life goals is slipping away. This feeling of falling backwards was beginning to get overwhelming. Regaining my perspective on this, accepting that growth isn't linear or neat or increasing at a predictable rate has helped me calm down and remember that a few bad days don't mean that it's ok to give up. I think I see the whole Tea Party movement as a big regression for our country, back to the mentality that elected and re-elected President Bush. It may be all I can do to comfort myself with the thought that it, too, is a temporary setback, the inevitable ebb of our progress away from those times. A few bad days (or news cycles, or elections) don't mean that it's ok to give up. For now, I'm going to try to sleep away whatever is ailing me and avoid any WebMD-induced panic.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Day 168- Michele Bachman, Hugo Chavez and Joe Barton
Q Michele Bachmann called the fund a redistribution of wealth fund. On FOX they’re calling it “Chavez-like” as in Venezuela Chavez. Can you speak --
MR. GIBBS: Not the boxer?
Q Not the boxer. (Laughter.) Can you speak to the larger theme here of Republican and conservative opposition to this as yet another Obama socialistic, big-government initiative?
MR. GIBBS: I mean, I don’t -- it’s hard to tell what planet these people live on. It’s hard to understand -- it’s hard to understand their viewpoint, but it may explain their votes on financial regulation; it explains how they view whether or not the banks ought to be able to write their own rules and play the game the way they played it in -- several years ago that caused our economy to crash. It’s understanding how we got an MMS that was handing out drugs in favor of drilling permits.
White House Press briefing 6/17/2010
Dear Mr. President,
I'm not often surprised by the Republicans. Normally, comparing your policies to Hugo Chavez's socialism, or kissing up to BP executives, seems like par for their particular course. But this is a national tragedy. I thought that the party of "America First" would be able to put aside their allegiance to their big donors for five minutes and recognize that an egregious crime has been committed against America and the American people and the company responsible needs to pay for the cost of cleaning it up and the livelihoods its negligence has ruined.
I suppose you have to admire their commitment to the "disagree with anything a Democrat says" strateg; such fidelity isn't often found in career politicians. Though I suppose, at this point in her career, Michele Bachmann is safe in the knowledge that her supporters don't expect a great deal of rational, or even logical thought. Still, this seems like a risky political move for any one trying to appoint themselves or their party as the standard bearer for the populist anger in this country. I'm dumbfounded. Maybe the rest of the country isn't as angry as I and most of the people I've encountered are; maybe the citizens of Texas and Minnesota who vote for Bachmann and Barton are huge supporters of BP and think that they shouldn't have to pay for this disaster. I've met my share of Minnesotans and more than a few Texans, however, and they don't seem like stupid people.
Anyway, Mr. President, I hope the next time a column is published about your lack of aggression or emotion, your inability to effectively "declare war" on BP, we all take a deep breath and remember that the legislative branch is still the most powerful, it's still run by people like Michele Bachmann and Joe Barton, still funded by BP and other corporate interests and we still have no one to blame for that but ourselves.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
MR. GIBBS: Not the boxer?
Q Not the boxer. (Laughter.) Can you speak to the larger theme here of Republican and conservative opposition to this as yet another Obama socialistic, big-government initiative?
MR. GIBBS: I mean, I don’t -- it’s hard to tell what planet these people live on. It’s hard to understand -- it’s hard to understand their viewpoint, but it may explain their votes on financial regulation; it explains how they view whether or not the banks ought to be able to write their own rules and play the game the way they played it in -- several years ago that caused our economy to crash. It’s understanding how we got an MMS that was handing out drugs in favor of drilling permits.
White House Press briefing 6/17/2010
Dear Mr. President,
I'm not often surprised by the Republicans. Normally, comparing your policies to Hugo Chavez's socialism, or kissing up to BP executives, seems like par for their particular course. But this is a national tragedy. I thought that the party of "America First" would be able to put aside their allegiance to their big donors for five minutes and recognize that an egregious crime has been committed against America and the American people and the company responsible needs to pay for the cost of cleaning it up and the livelihoods its negligence has ruined.
I suppose you have to admire their commitment to the "disagree with anything a Democrat says" strateg; such fidelity isn't often found in career politicians. Though I suppose, at this point in her career, Michele Bachmann is safe in the knowledge that her supporters don't expect a great deal of rational, or even logical thought. Still, this seems like a risky political move for any one trying to appoint themselves or their party as the standard bearer for the populist anger in this country. I'm dumbfounded. Maybe the rest of the country isn't as angry as I and most of the people I've encountered are; maybe the citizens of Texas and Minnesota who vote for Bachmann and Barton are huge supporters of BP and think that they shouldn't have to pay for this disaster. I've met my share of Minnesotans and more than a few Texans, however, and they don't seem like stupid people.
Anyway, Mr. President, I hope the next time a column is published about your lack of aggression or emotion, your inability to effectively "declare war" on BP, we all take a deep breath and remember that the legislative branch is still the most powerful, it's still run by people like Michele Bachmann and Joe Barton, still funded by BP and other corporate interests and we still have no one to blame for that but ourselves.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, March 19, 2010
Day 78
Dear Mr. President,
In today's New York Times, you're called "Barack the Unbreakable." I was so relieved to see this opinion piece, a writer willing to defy the standard narrative to point out the inconvenient reality- your poll numbers might be down, but they could be a lot worse. You're still perceived as more genuine than pretty much any other politician, and that's not without good reason. The American people understand that you're fighting so hard for health care because you believe it is the right thing to do. I think, when it passes, many of the unconvinced will be persuaded that this was the right issue to fight for.
As the votes in the house turn, as representatives begin to vote their conscience and not their self-interest, it's becoming clear that your confidence is the driving force behind the health care reform. Once it is passed, and the world does not end, we do not succumb to Stalinism and suffering, once the American people see that they've been lied to by conservatives seeking to protect powerful insurance interests, I hope that your poll numbers do go up. That being said, even if they bottom out, even if we lose the midterms and the white house in 2012, I will still be proud to have voted for you, Mr. President. Thank you for all you have done to prove that the presidency is about so much more than one's popularity.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
In today's New York Times, you're called "Barack the Unbreakable." I was so relieved to see this opinion piece, a writer willing to defy the standard narrative to point out the inconvenient reality- your poll numbers might be down, but they could be a lot worse. You're still perceived as more genuine than pretty much any other politician, and that's not without good reason. The American people understand that you're fighting so hard for health care because you believe it is the right thing to do. I think, when it passes, many of the unconvinced will be persuaded that this was the right issue to fight for.
As the votes in the house turn, as representatives begin to vote their conscience and not their self-interest, it's becoming clear that your confidence is the driving force behind the health care reform. Once it is passed, and the world does not end, we do not succumb to Stalinism and suffering, once the American people see that they've been lied to by conservatives seeking to protect powerful insurance interests, I hope that your poll numbers do go up. That being said, even if they bottom out, even if we lose the midterms and the white house in 2012, I will still be proud to have voted for you, Mr. President. Thank you for all you have done to prove that the presidency is about so much more than one's popularity.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Day 38
Dear Mr. President,
The bipartisan summit on health care is a significant risk. While I feel that you did very well in your open q & a with the republicans, there's no telling how the other democrats will come across. That being said, I'm glad you're doing it. I'm hopeful that it will be politically beneficial, and that it will move the health care debate forward. The other night, while discussing health care policy with one of my like-minded friends, she expressed concern that the passage of the current bill, which we both see as no solution but rather a step in the right direction, would breed complacency on the issue. I may have disagreed with her, but part of me fears she is right. I believe that the reform bill is important enough to pass now, but I also believe that, no matter how tired people are of the health care debate, the bill will not go far enough to help the people who need it the most. My hope is that, once the bill is passed and the whole system doesn't collapse, people will allow more aggressive reform.
I don't have health insurance, Mr. President. My employer offers it, but I've only recently become eligible for it. To make matters worse, recent years have seen premiums more than double, while co-pays increase and benefits decrease. None of the girls I live with are able to afford health insurance. Luckily for me, the last time I got sick, I was on vacation in Canada. The doctor I saw explained that, in his country, they tax things that make you sick, like cigarettes, alcohol, soda and fast food. He called this a "sin tax" and suggested, rather smugly, "Maybe if you did this in America, you could afford to give every one health insurance." I don't know if he was under the impression that a 23-year old bookstore employee had much say in national health care policy, or if he was just being condescending, but I was too grateful for the care I received to really mind the lecture.
I know proposing something like "sin tax" would be horribly unpopular here. While I may find it perfectly logical to increase the tax burden of those who themselves become burdens on the system through unhealthy behavior, I understand enough about human nature to know how difficult it would be to pass a tax on soda, for example. What about ending the government subsidies of corn and soy? Instead of punishing the taxpayer, we ought to end our outdated agricultural policies that discourage the small farmer and crop-diversity. This would help reduce the surplus of corn and soy derivatives that make processed food so cheap, discouraging consumption without actually taxing the least healthy foods.
But not all health care is about lifestyle choice. People get sick, people get injured, people have to have access to medical services, without the fear of financial ruin. I hope the summit helps pass the reform bill, and that it changes the way we approach health care. But I hope that those of us still waiting for real health care solutions won't be forgotten. It's more than politics, or even the long-term financial interest of our country. It is a matter of national pride. No one in America should suffer or die because they don't have enough money for treatment. No one in America should be bankrupt because they are sick. I hope one day we have a system our doctors can be smug about, even to Canadian tourists.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
The bipartisan summit on health care is a significant risk. While I feel that you did very well in your open q & a with the republicans, there's no telling how the other democrats will come across. That being said, I'm glad you're doing it. I'm hopeful that it will be politically beneficial, and that it will move the health care debate forward. The other night, while discussing health care policy with one of my like-minded friends, she expressed concern that the passage of the current bill, which we both see as no solution but rather a step in the right direction, would breed complacency on the issue. I may have disagreed with her, but part of me fears she is right. I believe that the reform bill is important enough to pass now, but I also believe that, no matter how tired people are of the health care debate, the bill will not go far enough to help the people who need it the most. My hope is that, once the bill is passed and the whole system doesn't collapse, people will allow more aggressive reform.
I don't have health insurance, Mr. President. My employer offers it, but I've only recently become eligible for it. To make matters worse, recent years have seen premiums more than double, while co-pays increase and benefits decrease. None of the girls I live with are able to afford health insurance. Luckily for me, the last time I got sick, I was on vacation in Canada. The doctor I saw explained that, in his country, they tax things that make you sick, like cigarettes, alcohol, soda and fast food. He called this a "sin tax" and suggested, rather smugly, "Maybe if you did this in America, you could afford to give every one health insurance." I don't know if he was under the impression that a 23-year old bookstore employee had much say in national health care policy, or if he was just being condescending, but I was too grateful for the care I received to really mind the lecture.
I know proposing something like "sin tax" would be horribly unpopular here. While I may find it perfectly logical to increase the tax burden of those who themselves become burdens on the system through unhealthy behavior, I understand enough about human nature to know how difficult it would be to pass a tax on soda, for example. What about ending the government subsidies of corn and soy? Instead of punishing the taxpayer, we ought to end our outdated agricultural policies that discourage the small farmer and crop-diversity. This would help reduce the surplus of corn and soy derivatives that make processed food so cheap, discouraging consumption without actually taxing the least healthy foods.
But not all health care is about lifestyle choice. People get sick, people get injured, people have to have access to medical services, without the fear of financial ruin. I hope the summit helps pass the reform bill, and that it changes the way we approach health care. But I hope that those of us still waiting for real health care solutions won't be forgotten. It's more than politics, or even the long-term financial interest of our country. It is a matter of national pride. No one in America should suffer or die because they don't have enough money for treatment. No one in America should be bankrupt because they are sick. I hope one day we have a system our doctors can be smug about, even to Canadian tourists.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
